How to Avoid a CtC Frivolous Penalty

A collection of old posts from all forums. No new threads or new posts in old threads allowed. For archive use only.
User avatar
webhick
Illuminati Obfuscation: Black Ops Div
Posts: 3994
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:41 am

How to Avoid a CtC Frivolous Penalty

Post by webhick »

Caught this over at LH today and couldn't wait to share.
Does the statement you wrote above your name ('all rights reserved....') on your tax form in any way negate your signature as legal testimony under penalties of perjury?

This may be one of the "tax protester" hot buttons the IRS is trained to zoom in on. They MUST have a valid return with no added qualifications. I don't see it is necessary since you WANT your signature to be the deciding factor in upholding the facts of your testimony.
Just my observation.
So, you heard it folks, if you want to avoid a frivolous penalty on your frivolous return, don't alter the jurat because that's one of the things they're looking for. It always amazes me how people in the "Truth" movement are always giving advice on how to avoid drawing attention to themselves.

[sarcasm]There's no law against theft, so why don't you distract the security guard while I swipe this t-shirt.[/sarcasm]

EDIT: There's also another tidbit about a possible CtC tax preparer:
When we signed the 1040X we added"All rights reserved without prejudice UCC1-307" above our signatures. I was told to do that by the guy who told me about CTC. He actually filled out our first 1040X (for 2003), for a fee.
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie
Imalawman
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: How to Avoid a CtC Frivolous Penalty

Post by Imalawman »

webhick wrote: EDIT: There's also another tidbit about a possible CtC tax preparer:
When we signed the 1040X we added"All rights reserved without prejudice UCC1-307" above our signatures. I was told to do that by the guy who told me about CTC. He actually filled out our first 1040X (for 2003), for a fee.
ooh, very interesting. I'm sure some people will be very interested in who is filing CTC returns for a profit.
"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
ASITStands
17th Viscount du Voolooh
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:15 pm

Post by ASITStands »

This same person has now posted her name and that of her husband.

Pg. 3, Posted February 15
Most respectfully,



Fred Pfeiffer Janiece Pfeiffer
All Rights Reserved
Sometimes I wonder about these people's intelligence. Sad.
jkeeb
Pirate Judge of Which Things Work
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:13 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Post by jkeeb »

How to avoid a CtC frivolous penalty???

Don't buy the book
Don't read the book
and don't do anything Pete would do.
Remember that CtC is about the rule of law.

John J. Bulten
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Post by Famspear »

Captain wrote:
"He's a Pfeiffer, she's a Pfeiffer. Wouldn't you like to be a Pfeiffer too?" 10, 2 and 4!
Dr. Pfeiffer - so misunderstood! If anyone would try you, they'd know you taste good!
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
User avatar
webhick
Illuminati Obfuscation: Black Ops Div
Posts: 3994
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:41 am

Post by webhick »

ASITStands wrote:This same person has now posted her name and that of her husband.

Pg. 3, Posted February 15
Most respectfully,



Fred Pfeiffer Janiece Pfeiffer
All Rights Reserved
Sometimes I wonder about these people's intelligence. Sad.
Oh, there's more:
Oh no I'm not a CPA. I've been an accountant off an on for about 30 years.
She's scary stupid.
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie
jkeeb
Pirate Judge of Which Things Work
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:13 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Post by jkeeb »

So they advertised their names and stupidity on the net, they're covered as they included the magic words, all rights reserved.
Remember that CtC is about the rule of law.

John J. Bulten
Quixote
Quatloosian Master of Deception
Posts: 1542
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 2:00 am
Location: Sanhoudalistan

Post by Quixote »

In her 2:47 PM post Janiece posted a copy of the letter she intends to deliver to the IRS.
After much research we think we may have found the problem. we added, what we thought was a correct statement to the jurat, but unknowingly that very act may have nullified our forms and unwittingly sent a message that we had the “desire to delay or impede the administration of Federal Tax Laws”, which we could not do anyway as neither of us are a “tax administrator”. Only those who are part of the taxing “authority” have that ability.
At 6:25, she posted this.
medclass wrote:
Janiece,

Are you a "tax administrator"? If you are not, then how can you "impede the administration" of any tax?

You have to be part of the taxing "authority" to have that ability.

Just an example of how "they" word-play and make you think you are the one they're writing about.

medclass
Can you elaborate on this? Like where does it say this in tax law?
It seems that "copy and paste first, research later" is SOP for the tax denier crowd.
"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
User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 4287
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 6:02 am

Post by grixit »

How can you be an accountant that long and not take a crack at the CPA exam?
Three cheers for the Lesser Evil!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Post by notorial dissent »

jkeeb wrote:So they advertised their names and stupidity on the net, they're covered as they included the magic words, all rights reserved.

And this comes as surprise why, considering the topic at hand and the forum it appeared in?? The only thing that surprises me is that they didn't include their social security numbers. Again, what amazes me is that somewhere in the very dim recesses of their dim recesses, they twigged to the fact that they might have done something wrong, just that they have the wrong wrong thing in mind. I also have a feeling they have other things to worry about besides voiding their jurat.
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.
The Operative
Fourth Shogun of Quatloosia
Posts: 885
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:04 pm
Location: Here, I used to be there, but I moved.

Post by The Operative »

grixit wrote:How can you be an accountant that long and not take a crack at the CPA exam?
There are many people that claim they are accountants, but are really not much more than entry-level bookkeepers. Some have no college education or may a two-year "accounting" degree from a community or technical college. Additionally, for the past several years, many states have increased requirements to match recommendations of the AICPA. The requirements are generally 150 semester credit hours of college education with a specified amount of accounting courses and a specified amount of business courses. While this particular person may have been able to take the CPA exam in the past with little or no education, they probably either didn't pass it or they didn't attempt it because they didn't need it for their job.
Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak.
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Post by Famspear »

The Operative wrote:
There are many people that claim they are accountants, but are really not much more than entry-level bookkeepers. Some have no college education or may a two-year "accounting" degree from a community or technical college. Additionally, for the past several years, many states have increased requirements to match recommendations of the AICPA. The requirements are generally 150 semester credit hours of college education with a specified amount of accounting courses and a specified amount of business courses. While this particular person may have been able to take the CPA exam in the past with little or no education, they probably either didn't pass it or they didn't attempt it because they didn't need it for their job.
I became a CPA in Louisiana in the early 1980s. Even back then, a candidate in Louisiana had to have at least a bachelor's degree, 24 semester hour credits of specified accounting courses, and 6 hours of business law courses, before the State Board would even let you sit for the Uniform CPA examination. One guy in the firm had graduated from college in another state and had passed the CPA exam in that other state, but had taken the job in Louisiana without obtaining his CPA certificate, thinking he would just get the certificate in Louisiana after the move. He couldn't get the certificate in Louisiana - because he had had only 3 hours of business law courses in college in the other state. Although he had an accounting degree with enough accounting courses and had already passed the CPA exam, the Louisiana Board said: go get another 3 hours of business law, then we'll issue the certificate.

By the way, back WHEN I TOOK THE EXAM (younger readers may now roll their eyes and brace themselves for a typical old geezer "back when I was young we had it so much tougher than you kids do now" speech), the AICPA Uniform CPA exam was a 19 and a half hour test, given in four parts (or really five, if you count "Practice" as two parts) over a three day period - using only pencil and paper (no calculators of any kind). Today the exam is shorter, is given on computer, and calculators are allowed. Back then, the national rate to pass all exam parts on the first try was somewhere around 5% to 15% for first-time candidates. Many states (like Louisiana) required back then that you take all four parts out of the gate, so you couldn't take the easier approach of just study one part, pass it, then move on to the next part. Also, if you passed 3 parts but made a very low score on the fourth part, you were deemed to have passed none. START OVER! Also, at that time, the FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) was in the process of issuing lots of new accounting standards, and the Auditing Standards Board of the AICPA was issuing lots of new auditing standards, that were being tested on the CPA exam. Many candidates took the exam once and then gave up after seeing what they were up against.

The 150 hour rule did not come in until many years later.
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet