Well, no. If they say that there hasn't been a valid return, then yes. However, you can't amend a return based on filing status (unless of course the was incorrect).Gregg wrote:Can she do that?19. I am submitting these "amended" returns with the filing status Married Filing
Separately, and do not speak for my husband nor file returns on his behalf.
Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended returns
-
- Enchanted Consultant of the Red Stapler
- Posts: 1808
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:23 pm
- Location: Formerly in a cubicle by the window where I could see the squirrels, and they were married.
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
"Some people are like Slinkies ... not really good for anything, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down the stairs" - Unknown
-
- Further Moderator
- Posts: 7521
- Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 11:48 pm
- Location: Virgin Islands Gunsmith
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
The first thought of mine upon reading this was, "Wow - the judge is obviously a Quatloosian."Doreen Hendrickson wrote:
10. As soon as I began reading my statement into the record [on December 15th], Judge Edmunds covered her face with her hands, sighed, rolled her eyes, and during my testimony sat with her head in her hand and elbow on her bench, appearing to be bored and annoyed.
In irons? And risk giving the sovrun paytriots the final proof, the veritable nail in the coffin, that we are railroading them through admiraltry court?Gregg wrote:And finally, why the hell dont they just drag her off in irons, lock her in a cell with Elaine Brown and see if they become friends or just reach critical mass of stupid and burst into flames?
"I could be dead wrong on this" - Irwin Schiff
"Do you realize I may even be delusional with respect to my income tax beliefs? " - Irwin Schiff
"Do you realize I may even be delusional with respect to my income tax beliefs? " - Irwin Schiff
-
- Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
- Posts: 5233
- Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
- Location: Earth
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
Not quite. IRC Section 2013(b) specifically allows taxpayers who file separately to later elect to file jointly. But I you're right that you can't go in the other direction, and that the election to file a joint return is irrevocable.Imalawman wrote:you can't amend a return based on filing status (unless of course the was incorrect).
So we're back to the question of whether the Hendrickson's original returns were "returns" on which binding elections could be made.
I guess the IRS will figure that out when they process Doreen's returns.
Meanwhile, what happens to Pete? Will the judge issue an order directing that he be held in civil contempt, and his criminal sentence suspended until he complies?
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
-
- Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
- Posts: 5233
- Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
- Location: Earth
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
Another possible issue is that Doreen's returns are claiming the standard deduction. (She put in the wrong amount for 2003, entering the single person's deduction instead of married filing separately, but that's not material.)
The problem is that if a married couple file separately, they either both have to claim the standard deduction or they both have to itemize. If Doreen's use of the standard deduction is valid, then Pete can not itemize and may lose the benefit of mortgage interest, real estate taxes, and other deductions. (Assuming they care at this point.)
The problem is that if a married couple file separately, they either both have to claim the standard deduction or they both have to itemize. If Doreen's use of the standard deduction is valid, then Pete can not itemize and may lose the benefit of mortgage interest, real estate taxes, and other deductions. (Assuming they care at this point.)
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
-
- Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
- Posts: 6120
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
- Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
Well, if the court officers will simply change out of their naval-style uniforms when Doreen is brought into court, maybe she won't catch on....The Observer wrote:The first thought of mine upon reading this was, "Wow - the judge is obviously a Quatloosian."Doreen Hendrickson wrote:
10. As soon as I began reading my statement into the record [on December 15th], Judge Edmunds covered her face with her hands, sighed, rolled her eyes, and during my testimony sat with her head in her hand and elbow on her bench, appearing to be bored and annoyed.
In irons? And risk giving the sovrun paytriots the final proof, the veritable nail in the coffin, that we are railroading them through admiraltry court?Gregg wrote:And finally, why the hell dont they just drag her off in irons, lock her in a cell with Elaine Brown and see if they become friends or just reach critical mass of stupid and burst into flames?
Last edited by Pottapaug1938 on Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
-
- Conde de Quatloo
- Posts: 5631
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 5:08 am
- Location: Der Dachshundbünker
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
Will it ever come to the point where the Judge just thows up her hands and gives up, and then lets the IRS seize everything that isn't nailed down and quite a lot of what is? Sorry, but this garbage is just getting to me and I really do see this return as a tactical retreat, Doreen files and that gets the contempt order off her back, Pete is in jail already and I guess they hope the BOP won't remember if he gets the contempt order enforced against him and adds whatever time to his sentence. Meanwhile, Doreen doesn't have enough income separately to have any tax to pay, so she thinks she's gonna put it all behind her.... What's next, is she going to claim innocent spouse? How many times do they get to play "whatcha gonna say to that" with contempt orders?LPC wrote:Not quite. IRC Section 2013(b) specifically allows taxpayers who file separately to later elect to file jointly. But I you're right that you can't go in the other direction, and that the election to file a joint return is irrevocable.Imalawman wrote:you can't amend a return based on filing status (unless of course the was incorrect).
So we're back to the question of whether the Hendrickson's original returns were "returns" on which binding elections could be made.
I guess the IRS will figure that out when they process Doreen's returns.
Meanwhile, what happens to Pete? Will the judge issue an order directing that he be held in civil contempt, and his criminal sentence suspended until he complies?
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
-
- Quatloosian Master of Deception
- Posts: 1542
- Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 2:00 am
- Location: Sanhoudalistan
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
There will be no seizing until an assessment and demand for payment are made. And then only after a CDP notice and the inevitable hearing.Will it ever come to the point where the Judge just thows up her hands and gives up, and then lets the IRS seize everything that isn't nailed down and quite a lot of what is?
"Here is a fundamental question to ask yourself- what is the goal of the income tax scam? I think it is a means to extract wealth from the masses and give it to a parasite class." Skankbeat
-
- Enchanted Consultant of the Red Stapler
- Posts: 1808
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:23 pm
- Location: Formerly in a cubicle by the window where I could see the squirrels, and they were married.
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
I've never been faced with that situation, so I just assumed it worked both ways. Thanks.LPC wrote:Not quite. IRC Section 2013(b) specifically allows taxpayers who file separately to later elect to file jointly. But I you're right that you can't go in the other direction, and that the election to file a joint return is irrevocable.Imalawman wrote:you can't amend a return based on filing status (unless of course the was incorrect).
"Some people are like Slinkies ... not really good for anything, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down the stairs" - Unknown
-
- Conde de Quatloo
- Posts: 5631
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 5:08 am
- Location: Der Dachshundbünker
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
Quixote wrote:There will be no seizing until an assessment and demand for payment are made. And then only after a CDP notice and the inevitable hearing.Will it ever come to the point where the Judge just thows up her hands and gives up, and then lets the IRS seize everything that isn't nailed down and quite a lot of what is?
Translated = about 12 years?
What about if the IRS notices like I did, and doesn't let her try to claim married/separate? I guess the court fights over that and other nit picky ways they can come up with to say they're trying to comply can drag this out for the rest of their lives.
What about...if the court says 'too bad, you both must be in compliance or you're both in contempt? Any chance of that?
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
-
- A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
- Posts: 13806
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
So how does it affect things that in the affidavit that Doreen basically says she is filing the corrected returns under duress and is claiming that they are false and as near as I can tell that she is repudiating that she signed them?
Wouldn’t this put her back to square one still being in contempt?
Wouldn’t this put her back to square one still being in contempt?
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
-
- Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
- Posts: 4287
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 6:02 am
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
B-but if they do that, the'll look awfully silly when it comes time to do the Gilbert and Sullivan medley!Pottapaug1938 wrote: Well, if the court officers will simply change out of their naval-style uniforms when Doreen is brought into court, maybe she won't catch on....
Three cheers for the Lesser Evil!
10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
-
- Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
- Posts: 6120
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
- Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
Perhaps you're right. Let's just make sure, then, that the judge doesn't tell Doreen that she has to go back to the brig.grixit wrote:B-but if they do that, the'll look awfully silly when it comes time to do the Gilbert and Sullivan medley!Pottapaug1938 wrote: Well, if the court officers will simply change out of their naval-style uniforms when Doreen is brought into court, maybe she won't catch on....
Last edited by Pottapaug1938 on Tue Jan 11, 2011 2:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
-
- Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
- Posts: 5233
- Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
- Location: Earth
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
I don't think so.notorial dissent wrote:So how does it affect things that in the affidavit that Doreen basically says she is filing the corrected returns under duress and is claiming that they are false and as near as I can tell that she is repudiating that she signed them?
Wouldn’t this put her back to square one still being in contempt?
Suppose that Doreen had dropped the returns into a mailbox while telling the strangers standing nearby, waiting for the bus, that "these returns are being filed under duress, and have no verity," would that in any way invalidate the returns? I think not.
I think that the gratuitous affidavit that Doreen filed with the court has the same effect on the validity of the returns as would gratuitous comments to passers-by, i.e., none.
If the returns she filed were false, the affidavit could be used to prove that they were knowingly false, but since the returns are true, the affidavit is irrelevant. (It is a crime to file a return that is knowingly false, which is what Pete was convicted of, but, contrary to what Doreen believes, it is not a crime to file a return that is unknowingly true.)
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
-
- Caveat Venditor
- Posts: 600
- Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:08 am
- Location: No longer behind the satellite dish, second door along - in fact, not even in the same building.
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
It seems to me (non-lawyer) that repudiating your signature in writing (I agree with notorial dissent) would be hugely different than making a comment to someone. For example, I don't think a car dealership would give you a car on your word that you promise to pay (even if you cross your heart and pinkie swear), they require a signature (even the car commercials say "sign then drive"). Same goes for a credit card charge (I have heard that below a certain amount a signature may not be required, but I have no experience with that). Ditto, a mortgage.
-
- A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
- Posts: 13806
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
LPC wrote: I don't think so.
Suppose that Doreen had dropped the returns into a mailbox while telling the strangers standing nearby, waiting for the bus, that "these returns are being filed under duress, and have no verity," would that in any way invalidate the returns? I think not.
I agree with you totally here
I think that the gratuitous affidavit that Doreen filed with the court has the same effect on the validity of the returns as would gratuitous comments to passers-by, i.e., none.
Here I will have to disagree, since she is in effect, by filing the affidavit along with the amended return with the court, filing formal and official notice to the court, “on the record”, that she is repudiating what she was ordered to do. I don’t see any difference with what she has done here and with what they did on the tax returns. They basically signed them and then repudiated the signing. Which to my mind is the same contempt, and it is quite obvious from the affidavit that despite the “false” outward show of contrition, that they are still in contempt of the court’s order.
If the returns she filed were false, the affidavit could be used to prove that they were knowingly false, but since the returns are true, the affidavit is irrelevant. (It is a crime to file a return that is knowingly false, which is what Pete was convicted of, but, contrary to what Doreen believes, it is not a crime to file a return that is unknowingly true.)
That is the true irony here, the returns that she is repudiating, actually are valid returns(at least by the IRS standards), probably not correct as someone pointed out several errors, but they still should stand as valid, except that she filed as single when they originally filed as married, and that opens a whole other philosophical line I don’t care to enter at the moment.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
-
- Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
- Posts: 7668
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
- Location: Texas
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
Side note: According to a post in one of the threads at losthorizons, PayPal is no longer accepting payments with respect to losthorizons.
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
-
- A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
- Posts: 13806
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
Well color me shocked and surprised!!!!! Someone must have finally complained about them or reported them to Paypal as a scam, I'm just surprised it took so long.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
-
- Khedive Ismail Quatoosia
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 4:19 pm
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
I'm sure it has to do with the Writ of Garnishment entered against Petey I mentioned here.notorial dissent wrote:Well color me shocked and surprised!!!!! Someone must have finally complained about them or reported them to Paypal as a scam, I'm just surprised it took so long.
(color added)Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:10-mc-51307-GER-PJK
United States of America v. Hendrickson
Assigned to: District Judge Gerald E Rosen
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Paul J Komives
Cause: No cause code entered
Date Filed: 12/01/2010
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 890 Other Statutory Actions
Jurisdiction: Federal Question
Plaintiff
United States of America represented by Jacqueline M. Hotz
United States Attorney's Office
211 W. Fort Street
Suite 2001
Detroit, MI 48226-3211
313-226-9108
Email: Jackie.Hotz@usdoj.gov
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
V.
Defendant
Peter Hendrickson
Date Filed # Docket Text
11/30/2010 RELATED to criminal case #08-20585 Dft 1 (PMil) (Entered: 12/01/2010)
11/30/2010 1 WRIT of continuing garnishment issued as to Peter Hendrickson and Garnishee Lost Horizon Corp. (PMil) (Entered: 12/01/2010)
11/30/2010 2 WRIT of continuing garnishment issued as to Peter Hendrickson and garnishee Comerica Bank. (PMil) (Entered: 12/01/2010)
11/30/2010 3 WRIT of continuing garnishment issued as to Peter Hendrickson and garnishee Paypal, Inc. (PMil) (Entered: 12/01/2010)
12/06/2010 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by United States of America re 2 Writ of Garnishment Issued on Comerica Bank (Hotz, Jacqueline) (Entered: 12/06/2010)
12/07/2010 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by United States of America re 3 Writ of Garnishment Issued on PayPal Inc. (Hotz, Jacqueline) (Entered: 12/07/2010)
12/07/2010 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by United States of America re 1 Writ of Garnishment Issued on Lost Horizon Corp. (Hotz, Jacqueline) (Entered: 12/07/2010)
12/15/2010 7 ANSWER to Continuing Garnishment by PayPal denying liability. (DSmi) (Entered: 12/16/2010)
12/17/2010 8 GARNISHEE disclosure by Comerica Bank denying liability as to Peter Hendrickson. (Boutell, Michael) (Entered: 12/17/2010)
12/21/2010 9 ANSWER to Continuing Garnishment by Lost Horizons Corp denying liability. (PPau) (Entered: 12/22/2010)
-
- A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
- Posts: 13806
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
Sorry, apparently totally missed that post.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
-
- Conde de Quatloo
- Posts: 5631
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 5:08 am
- Location: Der Dachshundbünker
Re: Pete and Doreen may have not filed correct amended retur
12/07/2010 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by United States of America re 1 Writ of Garnishment Issued on Lost Horizon Corp. (Hotz, Jacqueline) (Entered: 12/07/2010)
So what are the odds that that particular order is being complied with?
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.