LH v. IRM

A collection of old posts from all forums. No new threads or new posts in old threads allowed. For archive use only.
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

LH v. IRM

Post by LPC »

One of the more industrious drones at Lost Horizons has noticed some ominous changes to the IRM as of 1/1/2007, to wit:
3.11.3.14.7.1 (01-01-2007)
Line 64—Withholding
[...]
3. Remove from the batch and route to Criminal Investigation Fraud Detection Center any returns meeting all the following criteria:
- paper filed return
- refund claimed on return
- Form 4852 attached with no other withholding documentation present
And:
Exhibit 3.11.3-10 (01-01-2007)
Frivolous Filer/Non-filer Definitions
[...]
* Zero Returns on a Substitute Form: Taxpayer generally attaches either a substitute Form W-2, Form 1099, or Form 4852 that shows $0 wages or no wage information. A statement may be included indicating the taxpayer is rebutting information submitted to the IRS by the Payer. Entries are usually for Federal Income Tax withheld, Social Security Tax withheld, and/or Medicare Tax withheld. An explanation on the Form 4852 may cite "statutory language behind IRC 3401 and 3121", or may include some reference to the company refusing to issue a corrected Form W-2 for fear of IRS retaliation.
The response by Hendrickson is interestingly obtuse:
ForumAdmin wrote:It is worth noting that although there have apparently been some minor updates to these sections, as is suggested by the dates, none of this is new. Most of these programs and protocols have been in place since at least 2005, and possibly as far back as 2003-- see http://www.losthorizons.com/PostReplyToMSJ.pdf . Needless to point out to this group, some $2 million in victories have been secured by CtC-educated filers between then and now, many of them involving considerable agency contact and review (see http://www.losthorizons.com/tax/Highlights.htm ).

The fact that certain return characteristics have been selected for special (maybe even frantic and desperate) attention doesn't mean that any adverse consequences result from that attention...
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.
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Post by Famspear »

Peter E. ("Blowhard") Hendrickson wrote:
The fact that certain return characteristics have been selected for special (maybe even frantic and desperate) attention doesn't mean that any adverse consequences result from that attention...
I think the phrase "frantic and desperate" is more appropriately used to describe the filings by Blowhard Hendrickson in his appeal.
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
Kimokeo

Post by Kimokeo »

Frantic and desperate may apply when more of the $5,000 penalties surface.