Is Demo a Fascist?

[AFTP]

From Larken Rose’s latest:

“Since I was falsely convicted and imprisoned, the feds have upped
the penalty to $5,000 for filing a claim for refund based on
anything the IRS unilaterally declares to be "frivolous." If you
ask the Tax Court or District Court to hear your case, you can be
fined even more. In addition, thanks to the efforts of fascists
like J.J. McNaab, you can now be fined that much for REQUESTING a
"Collections Due Process" hearing. And soon, maybe you'll get
imprisoned for telling people to write to federal cops and judges,
asking them to answer questions about the law. After all, isn't
that "harassment"? You can bet that the federal cowards will view
it that way.”

Are his claims true?
If I ask for a hearing I could be fined?
If I request my rights or have sincere questions could I be fined?

[Doktor Avalanche]

I've been sitting here for the last couple of minutes trying to picture Demo in a brown shirt, jack boots and a funny little moustache.

Sorry, no....I just can't see it.

And that goes ditto for "Ilsa: She-Wolf of the S.S."

[Famspear]

Wow, I could go for a girl in uniform!

[The Operative]

Are his claims true?
If I ask for a hearing I could be fined?
If I request my rights or have sincere questions could I be fined?

Most of his claims are not true. IMO, the only one he got right was the IRS has increased the frivolous filing penalty to $5,000. The IRS does proclaim various tax arguments as frivolous, but AFAIK all of them have been tried in court several times and all have been deemed frivolous by the courts. Also, the IRS does publish a list of frivolous arguments in the hopes that people won't be stupid enough to actually claim them.

There are specific situations in which to file for a CDP hearing. In fact, the request form for a CDP hearing is only four pages and that includes complete instructions. The main instances for filing a request for a CDP hearing are when you receive a Notice of Federal Tax Lien or a Notice of Intent to Levy. The CDP hearing allows you the opportunity to ask for an installment agreement, propose an OIC, or pay off the debt. The CDP also allows for VALID excuses as to why a person may not be able to pay. The only instance where a person might get fined for filing a CDP that I can think of is when a person uses a frivolous argument to proclaim they don't owe any taxes.

[Investor]

CDP Hearings are also for stating defenses against assessment, such as statute of limitations. I have filed CDP Hearing requests, stating the reason as "the taxpayer believes the statute of limitations has expired and therefore the proposed assessment is invalid". I've never actually gone to a CDP Hearing - the matter has always been resolved over the phone prior to setting a hearing date. I have even been wrong on my assertion about the SOL, not realizing that an intervening event had tolled the statute for a period. Obviously, no fines were issued. I would imagine fines for CDP Hearing requests are for requests which list the reason for the hearing as "the income tax is unconstitutional", etc. As the Operative points out, those arguments have been resolved by the Courts and the government (understandably) is not going to spend time, money and energy to answer every one of these previously settled issues at a hearing - all while collection efforts are put on hold. These people complain about the overburdening government bureaucracy, yet they feel the government should sit down with every single person and answer their questions - even if the answer to their question is published for the whole world to see.

[Joey Smith]

Larken needs to spend more time trying to get his mullet under check and less time opining on things that he knows absolutely nothing about.

[Demosthenes]

From Larken Rose’s latest:

“Since I was falsely convicted and imprisoned, the feds have upped
the penalty to $5,000 for filing a claim for refund based on
anything the IRS unilaterally declares to be "frivolous." If you
ask the Tax Court or District Court to hear your case, you can be
fined even more. In addition, thanks to the efforts of fascists
like J.J. McNaab, you can now be fined that much for REQUESTING a
"Collections Due Process" hearing. And soon, maybe you'll get
imprisoned for telling people to write to federal cops and judges,
asking them to answer questions about the law. After all, isn't
that "harassment"? You can bet that the federal cowards will view
it that way.”

Are his claims true?
If I ask for a hearing I could be fined?
If I request my rights or have sincere questions could I be fined?

Have you read the new law he's talking about?

[Doktor Avalanche]

In Larken Rose's honor, I recommend we get the frivolous filer fine jacked up to $25,000.

And then we can call it "The Larken Rose Fine".

[Famspear]

Here's what Larken Rose is talking about.

Prior to the law change, section 6702 was captioned “FRIVOLOUS INCOME TAX RETURN,” and provided for a $500 penalty. The law changed the section 6702 caption to “FRIVOLOUS TAX SUBMISSIONS”. Specifically, Internal Revenue Code section 6702, as amended by the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109-432, (Dec. 20, 2006) (but see below for effective date):

SEC. 6702. FRIVOLOUS TAX SUBMISSIONS

(a) CIVIL PENALTY FOR FRIVOLOUS TAX RETURNS. --A person shall pay a penalty of $5,000 if --

(1) such person files what purports to be a return of a tax imposed by this title but which --

(A) does not contain information on which the substantial correctness of the self-assessment may be judged, or

(B) contains information that on its face indicates that the self-assessment is substantially incorrect, and

(2) the conduct referred to in paragraph (1) --

(A) is based on a position which the Secretary has identified as frivolous under subsection (c), or

(B) reflects a desire to delay or impede the administration of Federal tax laws.

(b) CIVIL PENALTY FOR SPECIFIED FRIVOLOUS SUBMISSIONS. --

(1) IMPOSITION OF PENALTY. --Except as provided in paragraph (3), any person who submits a specified frivolous submission shall pay a penalty of $5,000.

(2) SPECIFIED FRIVOLOUS SUBMISSION. --For purposes of this section --

(A) SPECIFIED FRIVOLOUS SUBMISSION. --The term "specified frivolous submission" means a specified submission if any portion of such submission --

(i) is based on a position which the Secretary has identified as frivolous under subsection (c), or

(ii) reflects a desire to delay or impede the administration of Federal tax laws.

(B) SPECIFIED SUBMISSION. --The term "specified submission" means --

(i) a request for a hearing under --

(I) section 6320 (relating to notice and opportunity for hearing upon filing of notice of lien), or

(II) section 6330 (relating to notice and opportunity for hearing before levy), and

(ii) an application under --

(I) section 6159 (relating to agreements for payment of tax liability in installments),

(II) section 7122 (relating to compromises), or

(III) section 7811 (relating to taxpayer assistance orders).

(3) OPPORTUNITY TO WITHDRAW SUBMISSION. --If the Secretary provides a person with notice that a submission is a specified frivolous submission and such person withdraws such submission within 30 days after such notice, the penalty imposed under paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to such submission.

(c) LISTING OF FRIVOLOUS POSITIONS. --The Secretary shall prescribe (and periodically revise) a list of positions which the Secretary has identified as being frivolous for purposes of this subsection. The Secretary shall not include in such list any position that the Secretary determines meets the requirement of section 6662(d)(2)(B)(ii)(II).

(d) REDUCTION OF PENALTY. --The Secretary may reduce the amount of any penalty imposed under this section if the Secretary determines that such reduction would promote compliance with and administration of the Federal tax laws.

(e) PENALTIES IN ADDITION TO OTHER PENALTIES. --The penalties imposed by this section shall be in addition to any other penalty provided by law.

The first list under section 6702(c) was promulgated by the Internal Revenue Service as Notice 2007-30, on March 15, 2007. Therefore, the $5,000 penalty applies to conduct that occurs (i.e., to submissions made and issues raised) on or after March 16, 2007. The currently operative statement by the IRS is Notice 2008-14, IR 2008-8 (Jan. 14, 2008).

[LPC]

If I request my rights or have sincere questions could I be fined?

The fines are *only* for "frivolous submissions," meaning submissions to the collection due process officer that contain tax denier arguments that have been identified by the IRS as "frivolous."

The statute also specifically provides that, if the taxpayer receives notice that a submission was frivolous and withdraws the submission within 30 days, there is no penalty.

I haven't yet seen any report of a frivolous submission penalty in a CDP hearing case, and I don't expect to see many. It's much easier to hold a telephonic hearing, cut it short when the taxpayer does not present any non-frivolous arguments, and then affirm the decision to begin collection actions.

[Joey Smith]

Accuracy has never been Larken's strong suit.

[Demosthenes]

Accuracy has never been Larken's strong suit.

You have to consider the source.

Source.... Larken ... get it?

[Judge Roy Bean]

Accuracy has never been Larken's strong suit.

With all due respect, and recognizing Rose as a nut ball scam promoter, from personal experience "accuracy" hasn't exactly been the IRS's strong suit. Statistically (which is a slippery slope to begin with) the error rate is probably acceptable. But it isn't exactly a position from which to claim a PR advantage.

[grixit]

From Larken Rose’s latest:

“Since I was falsely convicted and imprisoned, the feds have upped
the penalty to $5,000 for filing a claim for refund based on
anything the IRS unilaterally declares to be "frivolous." If you
ask the Tax Court or District Court to hear your case, you can be
fined even more. In addition, thanks to the efforts of fascists
like J.J. McNaab, you can now be fined that much for REQUESTING a
"Collections Due Process" hearing. And soon, maybe you'll get
imprisoned for telling people to write to federal cops and judges,
asking them to answer questions about the law. After all, isn't
that "harassment"? You can bet that the federal cowards will view
it that way.”

Are his claims true?
If I ask for a hearing I could be fined?
If I request my rights or have sincere questions could I be fined?

Sorry, that's only a 1 on the Van Meter.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Sorry, that's only a 1 on the Van Meter.

Your Van Meter is malfunctioning. I was able to get at least a 7 on mine.

Incidently, I just bought a new one today.



The old one was a little cumbersome...