Larken Rose in Trouble Again

[AFTP]

29 minute rant-o-matic of "Huff and Puff".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2y5kGU- ... ploademail

[Dezcad]

I love how he consistently makes incorrect references to the "IRS is the Mafia". Does he really think that the Mafia would let him post videos like this and not pay them?

I sometimes wish Larken was the target of the Mafia, then we wouldn't see these stupid rants of his.

What a maroon!

[AFTP]

I understand he most likely is speaking figuratively.
Like when people call the cops "Nazis".

I am confused about one thing. If he did request a hearing, why wasn't it granted?
He claims the IRS violated due process, could he be right?

When I dealt with the IRS they said I violated a section of the code. When I asked for what section they were referring to so I could show my CPA they refused.
All they did was threaten to take things.

When my mother had problems we sent a letter asking what part of the code she violated. They ignored the request and sent threats of liens.
So in a way I can feel where he's coming from.

[fortinbras]

He evidently got a hearing and decided to stay home and make this stupid video instead.

Notice that the same Youtube webpage shows he has another video on When is it OK to shoot a cop. Any govt agency that has to deal with Rose probably would be well advised to meet him only in places where he'd first be frisked, and if they have to come to his place to serve papers or seize property they should come armed and cautious.

[notorial dissent]

Not like we didn't know it from before, but Barkin' Larkin is not the sharpest knife in the drawer, and he keeps proving it with startling regularity. Larkin is another of the crowd that I would want want outside confirmation if he said the sun was coming up.

[Dr. Caligari]

Can someone tell me what trouble he has gotten himself into now? I have no desire to watch any stupid video he made.

[Famspear]

Can someone tell me what trouble he has gotten himself into now? I have no desire to watch any stupid video he made.

I watched part of it. He says the IRS wants over $300,000 in connection with the medical transcription business he and his wife had a few years back. He treated his workers as independent contractors and the IRS asserts that they were employees. The 941 taxes.

Tidbit: At about 11:34 in the video, he says he's losing his house and he has no car.

EDIT: Clarification: He says it's the bank that's taking his house.

[AndyK]

On the plus side, he seemd to have finally lost the mullet.

But, he seems to have gained quite a few pounds -- must be that high-starch diet.

[AndyK]

Despite all of his whining, he obviously responded to letters (which specified cut-off dates for filing in tax court) by requesting 'meetings' to discuss his issues.

For all of his years of legal research and analysis of the tax code, he clearly missed the basic steps.

He is much like David Merrill in that HE has decided that he gets to set all the rules.

[Gregg]

I love how he consistently makes incorrect references to the "IRS is the Mafia". Does he really think that the Mafia would let him post videos like this and not pay them?

I sometimes wish Larken was the target of the Mafia, then we wouldn't see these stupid rants of his.

What a maroon!

Maybe we can get some interns to find an unsolved mafia hit and turn a few hints into the 'capo

[wserra]

Does he ever explain why anyone else should care about his years of self-inflicted pain?

[notorial dissent]

Because he is such an inherently sweet and wonderful person, he's got such a great singing voice, the save the mullet foundation needs a new spokesperson, I mean we're dealing in fantasy here anyway, these are as good as I can come up with.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Can someone tell me what trouble he has gotten himself into now? I have no desire to watch any stupid video he made.

I watched part of it. He says the IRS wants over $300,000 in connection with the medical transcription business he and his wife had a few years back. He treated his workers as independent contractors and the IRS asserts that they were employees. The 941 taxes.

Tidbit: At about 11:34 in the video, he says he's losing his house and he has no car.

EDIT: Clarification: He says it's the bank that's taking his house.

I notice he never sent them proof that he wasn't an employer, he just keeps denying he is an employer. Any chance his "sub-contractors" have all told the IRS that they were employees because either it saves them tax and/or it drops their idiot employer in it with the IRS?

[AFTP]

I notice he never sent them proof that he wasn't an employer

How would you prove that?

[Gregg]

I notice he never sent them proof that he wasn't an employer

How would you prove that?

There is an actual list of certain conditions that help you determine that distinction. I think it's got a few dozen things on it,

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/art ... 21,00.html

It took me 10 seconds of "long research" to find that, so I can see why he's having such a hard time figuring it out.

[ArthurWankspittle]

I notice he never sent them proof that he wasn't an employer

How would you prove that?

For a start you'd have a contract (this is currently a very difficult area of employment /sub-contract law in the UK) stating that you are hiring the said staff as self employed sub-contractors. Hence my comment that if there's not contract it could down to who says what, which could be amusing when one of the parties is a tax denying windbag full of his own mistaken opinions. Plus who is the IRS likely to believe and who can they get their money out of? Some minion who did a bit of typing who has moved trailer into another state or some windbag tax protester who owns a house?
Not having a contract or other documentation means windbag has shot himself in the foot, so to speak. Apparently though this isn't unusual.

[JamesVincent]

Did he actually file 1099s for them or not file anything for them? If he filed 1099s for them then theyd be responsible for the tax no matter what argument anyone else brings up. If he didnt file anything for them or if they have paystubs showing that he was withholding then let him have fun paying for all of them. Im guessing he didnt have an accountant during those years? Of course not, why would I bother asking that. But yeah without a contract stating unequivocally that they were working as 1099 contractors or employees and his filing 1099s in their names he'd have a hard sell trying to prove that they were indeed 1099 employees of any type, especially considering his past record.

[AFTP]

Did he actually file 1099s for them or not file anything for them?

I would guess no.
He didn't file for himself and went to jail.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Typical bozo management scenario. If you don't file your own taxes, you don't have any need to deduct worker expenses and thus you don't have to fill out those pesky 1099's.

[JamesVincent]

Typical bozo management scenario. If you don't file your own taxes, you don't have any need to deduct worker expenses and thus you don't have to fill out those pesky 1099's.

The IRS really should have a stamp that just says "Tough titty says the kitty" with a picture of Demo's avatar. Good luck on that sell with no paper trail to back it up. Without a binding contract or copies of 1099s I doubt theyll even really talk to the employees considering who it is, theyll just tack it on to his debt.