The poor doofus can't even get that part right. This may relate to what he's thinking:wings wrote:.........I did read that even though the money is not owed, or is being collected illegally, paying voluntarily means one cannot sue for its return unless notice is given that payment is due to coercion, duress, etc., and that the collection of said taxes is illegal....
Protest [e.g., in connection with payment to a taxing authority]:
--Black’s Law Dictionary, p. 1101 (5th Ed. 1979).The formal statement, usually in writing, made by a person who is called upon by public authority to pay a sum of money, in which he declares that he does not concede the legality or justice of the claim or his duty to pay it, or that he disputes the amount demanded; the object being to save his right to recover or reclaim the amount, which right would be lost by his acquiescence. Thus, taxes may be paid under "protest".
In the case of U.S. Federal taxes, however, the taxpayer's failure to protest does not deprive the taxpayer of the right to file an administrative claim with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for a refund and, if the claim is not allowed by the IRS, to sue for a tax refund in Federal district court. See generally 28 USC section 1346(a)(1); Internal Revenue Code section 6532(a); and, in particular, Internal Revenue Code section 7422(b):
In other words, in the case of Federal taxes, a person paying a sum he or she believes is erroneous, etc., is NOT required to give the notice described by "wings" to preserve his or her rights.Such suit or proceeding may be maintained whether or not such tax, penalty, or sum has been paid under protest or duress.
---(adapted from something I wrote in "another place")....
Join the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign!
