User "justinprime" at losthorizons writes:
TDL - If you look at my quotes in the original post, you can see the misleading directions of the 8275. It seems like a set-up to me. LH is filled with victories and I have never once seen an 8275 being used. I have, however, seen numerous cover letters and non-IRS documents being submitted to the IRS. There's a history of victories there. It doesn't make sense to me to deviate at this point.
http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... 6666#26666
In other words, the fact that you conned the IRS into sending you an erroneous refund is a "victory" for the CtC "non-method" method, and proves that CtC is "really the law?" And the fact that the Internal Revenue Service began all the subsequent actions against you, such as imposing frivolous penalties, levying on assets, and so on, just proves how evil and bad the IRS is -- in other words, that there is no "silver bullet"?
There is always going to be people advocating for the use of different forms or some silver bullet. Until the day comes where those are proven successful, I'll stick with what has been shown to get the job done. (Not saying the 8275 is not useful, but based on the history of CtC filings...)
In other words, "getting the job done" means nothing more than obtaining your erroneous refund, and all the bad stuff that follows is... what?
If we continue down the path of trying to find the right form, the right words, we become entangled in their web, in their game. My plan is to keep it simple, keep the ball in their court with minimal "arguments" from my side and consistently deferring back to them to explain and support their allegations. My plan is to build a court case and keep my foundation strong, with minimal input on my side besides the basic necessities.
And what's your plan once you get into court? Everyone, including Hendrickson himself, has lost in court. How are you expecting to WIN in court?
And user "GK" writes:
Forms are irrelevant. Law is irrelevant. Argument is irrelevant.
That's a novel approach. GK continues:
All that remains is the following:
Were you engaged in a revenue taxable activity?
Do you have proof?
Does the IRS care? Answer: No.
If not, then return monies withheld against potential liability, as none was incurred.
And how are you going to get the IRS to change its mind and agree with you that the existence of a "revenue taxable activity" is required? How are you going to get a federal judge to rule in your favor if you end up in court?
What a hopeless, clueless group of losers.....
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet