Ex-Navy TP tries to save his pension

[SteveSy]

It is as Dan said recently: what they write is gibberish to us, because what we write is gibberish to them. People like Steve really don't see the world (and the tax law in particular) the way it really is, because these people can't distinguish the world from themselves -- or to be more precise, they can't distinguish the world from their own delusional beliefs about themselves.

What a load of crap. It has nothing whatsoever to do with narcissism. It appears you don't even know what the hell the word means. Because I read the words literally or see it differently than you I'm a narcissist? If anything even making that statement proves beyond a doubt you are the narcissist. You're so infatuated with your own self proclaimed "expertise" you feel it's impossible for anyone to disagree with you and not have some mental deficiency. Dan and a few others also have this infatuation with your own grandness.

Whatever, this frigging board is filled with narcissists. All one has to do is look at how you guys respond to disagreement and how "you" routinely rely on the fact that "you" know because "you" are some kind of expert therefore "you" are correct because you are superior. Look no farther than the mirror sir, you are the narcissist as are most who post in defense of the government here. The truth is most of you are anonymous nobodies who have found an outlet to satisfy your need to feed your own narcissism.

I had an acquaintaince a few years back who was very caught up in narcissistic personality disorder, and it was obvious that he really did not realize that most people were not nearly as interested in HIS thoughts, HIS beliefs, HIS desires, HIS interests. He really did not have a strong grasp of how disliked he was among other people; he was simply so self-centered that he could not use objective criteria -- criteria imposed on an outside "authority" as a basis for evaluating himself or his daily life. Everything in the world, in his mind, was about what HE believed, what HE desired, what HE was interested in.

It seems your are speaking in the third person. What you have described is the personality of most on this board. If people do not accept what your beliefs, desires or interests are, they're morons, undereducated imbeciles and just downright mentally deficient. This is why you have such an infatuation with TP's, it's your avenue to proclaim how superior you are to other people. You have the courts, who are appointed by and paid for by the very entity under discussion, to agree with you. Of course the same could be said about every other supporter of government under any regime, including the most evil of them. Intellectual discussion be damned, they can say anything no matter how stupid or unreasonable and its right in your mind. To prove this you have others who think just like you to agree, that's your proof. It's just like Gore, the issue is settled, everyone who matters agrees with him. Of course the only one's that matter to him are the one's who agree with him. It's the perfect narcissistic environment for you.

[SteveSy]

The sad part about this is that the IRS has the power to totally destroy someone for years if not life. The can add on interest and penalties that far exceed the principal. They have power far beyond ANY other entity making monetary claims. They can seize your home, paycheck, property and retirement with little effort. A power that can be wielded from afar with a simple notice. It's not unreasonable that they should be required to legally be held accountable for their accusations. To sit there and with your pompous attitude without concern for lives being destroyed everyday and claim people are idiots for simply wanting accountability is pathetic in my book. I'm sure most would rather have their knee caps smashed than have their lives taken away by notice of a debt they never agreed to by someone they had never met. At least the pain only lasts for a month and healing takes maybe a year vs. losing everything you worked for over the last 20-30 years with little chance of ever recovering it by starting completely over. Go ahead take pride in your support...I'll sit back watch you in disgust.

[Gregg]

You're so infatuated with your own self proclaimed "expertise" you feel it's impossible for anyone to disagree with you and not have some mental deficiency. Dan and a few others also have this infatuation with your own grandness.

Whatever, this frigging board is filled with narcissists. All one has to do is look at how you guys respond to disagreement and how "you" routinely rely on the fact that "you" know because "you" are some kind of expert therefore "you" are correct because you are superior.

Not being a lawyer myself, if I want a definitive opinion on a legal matter, I'd go to a lawyer. Because while I'd agree it's possible to find a lawyer who is not an expert on the law (hey, it happens, look at TD lawyers) it's very unlikely that I'd find an expert who is NOT a lawyer. Or not an expert I'd trust my legal issues to. I'm a lapsed accountant by training, and since I haven't been a real practicing accountant in over a decade, I wouldn't trust my own accounting advice any more than in broad terms. I don't do my own taxes, for instance. But the things I do for a living now, your damn right I consider myself an expert. Not some kind of expert, but possibly "the expert' and I don't even have much in the way of applicable education in the field.

Lawyers, when you ask them about the law, or when you talk to them about the law, are not giving any opinion or endorsement of the law. They may or may not agree with or like the law, but a good one is damn good at telling you what the court will say the law is if the question is brought before them. In this case, you, an unschooled person with a passing interest in a fairly nit picky reading of an arcane statute say it "means" one thing. The lawyers who disagree with you, are, well, lawyers. Dan is perceived by a lot of people who matter on the subject, a real expert, his work is often quoted and cited in important places where decisions that matter are made. Your opinion carries considerably less weight. And the people whose decisions really matter, the Judges who our government charges with final authority on the law means, agree with Dan and the other people here. You can try to convince a few nutbags over at LH, or a cadre of crazies at Sui, and it matters not a whit. When you convince a Judge, come back and see us about that.

We'll be waiting.

[The Observer]

The sad part about this is that the IRS has the power to totally destroy someone for years if not life.

Are we talking about people like Ed Brown, Dick Simkanin, Irwin Schiff? What about their responsibility for taking a position that was going to put them square in the sights of the IRS, DOJ, and the courts? They don't have any accountability for making asinine assumptions that they know the law better than 200+ years of judicial tradition - and then acting on those assumptions?

The can add on interest and penalties that far exceed the principal.

But that is authorized by Congress under law. That doesn't happen just because the IRS wants to do that.

They have power far beyond ANY other entity making monetary claims. They can seize your home, paycheck, property and retirement with little effort.

Again, that is mandated by Congress, not by IRS fiat. And if you stop to think about it, when a taxpayer has a legitimate tax liability that needs to be collected, why should the government force the IRS to go through a series of senseless procedures to collect that money simply because the taxpayer does not want to pay?

A power that can be wielded from afar with a simple notice. It's not unreasonable that they should be required to legally be held accountable for their accusations.

The IRS can be held accountable for any erroneous assessments or collections. There are procedures in place that the IRS must go through before those assessments and collections take place and which provide the taxpayer full notice of what is transpiring. And after the assessments and collections become reality, the taxpayer has due process procedures in place that allow them to contest IRS actions and to have their day in court - and sometimes it means the idiot TPs get to trot out their frivolous arguments for the umpteenth time. And the IRS has been sanctioned by the courts when it has broken the law.

So please trot out some cases where the IRS illegally assessed and illegally collected against a taxpayer and they were ruined and the courts laughed in their face. But of course you should try to avoid the ones where the taxpayers were being blithering idiots and getting sanctions for arguing that the 16th Amendment doesn't mean what it says. Otherwise you are going to get laughed out of this forum again for the millionth time.

To sit there and with your pompous attitude without concern for lives being destroyed everyday and claim people are idiots for simply wanting accountability is pathetic in my book.

And what is pathetic in my book is your continual griping about how you think the system works without facts, reason, logic or understanding about how the system really works.

'm sure most would rather have their knee caps smashed than have their lives taken away by notice of a debt they never agreed to by someone they had never met. At least the pain only lasts for a month and healing takes maybe a year vs. losing everything you worked for over the last 20-30 years with little chance of ever recovering it by starting completely over. Go ahead take pride in your support...I'll sit back watch you in disgust.

And of course no post from you would be complete without an attempt at taking this thread into pure hyperbole and rhetoric and as far away from the fact and truth as possible.

[Famspear]

What a load of crap. It has nothing whatsoever to do with narcissism. It appears you don't even know what the hell the word means. Because I read the words literally or see it differently than you I'm a narcissist? If anything even making that statement proves beyond a doubt you are the narcissist. You're so infatuated with your own self proclaimed "expertise" you feel it's impossible for anyone to disagree with you and not have some mental deficiency. Dan and a few others also have this infatuation with your own grandness.

Calm down, Steve. First, although I am not a psychologist, I do indeed have some knowledge of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. I have studied the topic.

No, I'm not convinced that you personally have Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and I apologize for giving that impression.

I have never proclaimed that I have expertise in accounting or law. You are quite wrong about that. One of the things I was taught in school is that there is no such thing as a "self-proclaimed" expert. By definition, "expert" status is something granted to you by someone else.

I can't speak for others, but I have no "grandness," and I have no "infatuation" with "grandness."

Whatever, this frigging board is filled with narcissists. All one has to do is look at how you guys respond to disagreement and how "you" routinely rely on the fact that "you" know because "you" are some kind of expert therefore "you" are correct because you are superior.

No, you are quite wrong. You will almost never see any Quatloos regular here say that he or she is right because he or she is some kind of expert. (Yes, I might say that I have an accounting degree, or a law degree, or that I am licensed as a CPA or attorney, or that I have XX years of experience, or that I have published XX articles. Describing my credentials, my training, and my experience is not, in and of itself, proclaiming myself to be an expert.)

Look no farther than the mirror sir, you are the narcissist as are most who post in defense of the government here. The truth is most of you are anonymous nobodies who have found an outlet to satisfy your need to feed your own narcissism.

Baloney. I would suggest that you go back and read the definition of narcissism. Steve, you're using the term as an epithet. Your feelings were hurt, and you're using the term as an epithet, to lash out.

You will see me write things, from time to time, like "the law is what I say the law is." That's not narcissism. That's evidence of confidence in my own knowledge. Yes, the law is what I say the law is -- not because I'm the one who says it, but because I've studied the law carefully enough to be "right" -- nearly all the time. That doesn't mean I'm an expert; it doesn't mean I proclaim myself to be an expert; and it doesn't mean that I have abilities above and beyond any other tax practitioner.

I, like many other people here in this forum, do have a knowledge of the law, the tax law, that is both qualitatively and quantitatively different from your knowledge, or the knowledge of most people -- just as you have knowledge about computers that is qualitatively and quantitatively superior to my knowledge. The fact that I know that my knowledge exceeds your knowledge in a particular area -- and that I make that fact known -- is not evidence of "narcissism."

[Famspear]

SteveSy wrote:

The sad part about this is that the IRS has the power to totally destroy someone for years if not life. The can add on interest and penalties that far exceed the principal. They have power far beyond ANY other entity making monetary claims. They can seize your home, paycheck, property and retirement with little effort. A power that can be wielded from afar with a simple notice.

I agree with you that the Internal Revenue Service does have the legal power to do these things without having to go to court. That's a tremendous amount of power.

It's not unreasonable that they [IRS personnel] should be required to legally be held accountable for their accusations.

Agreed.

To sit there and with your pompous attitude without concern for lives being destroyed everyday and claim people are idiots for simply wanting accountability is pathetic in my book.

Well, first, if you're talking about me, I don't have a "pompous" attitude about it. I'm the one out here in the real world dealing with the Internal Revenue Service on behalf of taxpayers -- not you, Steve. I'm the one dealing with the IRS to get that certificate of nonattachment, or that certificate of release of lien -- not you, Steve. I'm the one dealing with the IRS to get that penalty waived (I have a pretty good track record on that, by the way) -- not you. I'm the one calling the IRS to get this tax or that penalty put in "53" or "currently not collectible" status -- stopping the collection efforts of the IRS -- not you. I'm also the one dealing with the IRS when a client is examined -- not you. I'm the one getting the "no change" RAR from the Revenue Agent -- not you. I'm the one protecting taxpayers -- not you, Steve. So, save the rhetoric; you're not convincing.

Second, in this forum, we're talking about tax protesters here. Unlike my clients, these people are not demanding "accountability." Unlike my clients, these people are using tortured, idiosyncratic interpretations of statutes to oppose the federal income tax. It makes little if any difference, in terms of protection of taxpayer rights, whether for example a Notice of Federal Tax Lien is signed "under penalty of perjury" or not. Do you really think that the tax protesters who fight summonses and Notices of Federal Tax Liens are doing so because they really believe that they want to hold the IRS accountable? You think that's the motivation?

Come on. Unlike my clients, these people are just hopping from one tactic to another in an attempt to prevent the tax man from getting their money (or the home or the car or whatever).

I have also offerred to help some tax protesters on line -- free of charge. I don't think it's something I can or should do on a regular basis. I have done it only a couple of times or so, and I strongly suggest that they do hire a tax professional in their own locality -- and THAT THEY PAY THAT PROFESSIONAL. However, on a few occasions, I have provided some free time and technical suggestions (for a few people in the Cracking the Code scam, for example). When I do that, I try to remember to do it with a disclaimer, and I do try to make it clear that no practitioner-client relationship is to be inferred from the free suggestions I give (I try to call them "suggestions" and not "advice").

So, save your expression of "disgust," Steve. You're not convincing.

[Nikki]

The sad part about this is that the IRS has the power to totally destroy someone for years if not life. The can add on interest and penalties that far exceed the principal. They have power far beyond ANY other entity making monetary claims. They can seize your home, paycheck, property and retirement with little effort. A power that can be wielded from afar with a simple notice.

Why is it that people fail to make the distinction between the work being done by an Executive branch agency and the laws -- enacted by congress -- which define what that agency can, must, and can not do?

For example interest: The IRS is required, by law, to add interest to unpaid tax debts (and unpaid refunds to the taxpayer) and is not permitted to forgive that interest except in conditions where an IRS ministerial action improperly prolonged a dispute.

Penalties, again, are specified by law. The IRS can't impose a $29.95 penalaty for a frivolous return -- it must be $5,000 as specified by the law.

However, the vast majority of the critics of the IRS totally ignore the legal underpinnings and just whine about the results.

[GoldandSilverEagles]

I agree with you that the Internal Revenue Service does have the legal power to do these things without having to go to court. That's a tremendous amount of power.

Bull. There's nothing legal in their power of intimidation.They issue bogus "notices of lien" and don't back them by legally filing/registering the lien in Washington DC.

This "legal power to do these things without having to go to court" is a bunch of crap. Who else, but the irs, can issues bogus liens* and levies* (*issued without accompanying an appropriate court order, warrant, or judgment) and frighten the prostitute (an employer, a bank, etc) into surrendering property.

It's organized crime similar to the mafia. It's no wonder they have been called the 'federal mafia'.

[Prof]

I agree with you that the Internal Revenue Service does have the legal power to do these things without having to go to court. That's a tremendous amount of power.

Bull. There's nothing legal in their power of intimidation.They issue bogus "notices of lien" and don't back them by legally filing/registering the lien in Washington DC.

This "legal power to do these things without having to go to court" is a bunch of crap. Who else, but the irs, can issues bogus liens* and levies* (*issued without accompanying an appropriate court order, warrant, or judgment) and frighten the prostitute (an employer, a bank, etc) into surrendering property.

It's organized crime similar to the mafia. It's no wonder they have been called the 'federal mafia'.

You have no idea how statutory liens work, including ad valorem tax liens and mechanics and materialmens liens. After you look up the process/procedures for those liens, you'll find that those operate in much the same way as the IRS lien. The only reason a notice of lien has to be filed by the IRS, by the way, is in order to give notice to third parties -- not to give any notice, etc., to the debtor/taxpayer.

And yes, I'm pretty experienced in this area.

[Nikki]

I agree with you that the Internal Revenue Service does have the legal power to do these things without having to go to court. That's a tremendous amount of power.

Bull. There's nothing legal in their power of intimidation.They issue bogus "notices of lien" and don't back them by legally filing/registering the lien in Washington DC.

This "legal power to do these things without having to go to court" is a bunch of crap. Who else, but the irs, can issues bogus liens* and levies* (*issued without accompanying an appropriate court order, warrant, or judgment) and frighten the prostitute (an employer, a bank, etc) into surrendering property.

It's organized crime similar to the mafia. It's no wonder they have been called the 'federal mafia'.

You don't have a clue, do you?

First, the lien does not require "an appropriate court order, warrant, or judgment' because it is the result of a statutory occurrence -- a law:

Section 6321. Lien for taxes
If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same after demand, the amount (including any interest, additional amount, addition to tax, or assessable penalty, together with any costs that may accrue in addition thereto) shall be a lien in favor of the United States upon all property and rights to property, whether real or personal, belonging to such person.

The lien happens automatically as the result of the law. The notice is merely that, a notice that the lien exists.

You really should put your brain in gear before running your mouth.

[GoldandSilverEagles]

I agree with you that the Internal Revenue Service does have the legal power to do these things without having to go to court. That's a tremendous amount of power.

Bull. There's nothing legal in their power of intimidation.They issue bogus "notices of lien" and don't back them by legally filing/registering the lien in Washington DC.

This "legal power to do these things without having to go to court" is a bunch of crap. Who else, but the irs, can issues bogus liens* and levies* (*issued without accompanying an appropriate court order, warrant, or judgment) and frighten the prostitute (an employer, a bank, etc) into surrendering property.

It's organized crime similar to the mafia. It's no wonder they have been called the 'federal mafia'.

You don't have a clue, do you?

First, the lien does not require "an appropriate court order, warrant, or judgment' because it is the result of a statutory occurrence -- a law:

Section 6321. Lien for taxes
If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same after demand, the amount (including any interest, additional amount, addition to tax, or assessable penalty, together with any costs that may accrue in addition thereto) shall be a lien in favor of the United States upon all property and rights to property, whether real or personal, belonging to such person.

The lien happens automatically as the result of the law. The notice is merely that, a notice that the lien exists.

You really should put your brain in gear before running your mouth.

Then show me the court order, warrant, or judgements that precede irs notices of liens and levys.

The irs does not have the authority to make the legal determination that a law has been broken.

The irs, just like any other agency of the federal government can make the allegation that a law has been broken, but it is the job of the courts and the responsibility of the courts to make that legal determination, via a court order, warrant, or judgment.

In an over simplication, if such was not the case, then people accused of "breaking the law" in the federal system wouldn;t be indicted for tax crimes.

[The Operative]

Then show me the court order, warrant, or judgements that precede irs notices of liens and levys.

The irs does not have the authority to make the legal determination that a law has been broken.

The irs, just like any other agency of the federal government can make the allegation that a law has been broken, but it is the job of the courts and the responsibility of the courts to make that legal determination, via a court order, warrant, or judgment.

In an over simplication, if such was not the case, then people accused of "breaking the law" in the federal system wouldn;t be indicted for tax crimes.

The Supreme Court disagrees with you, which means you are wrong.

As a general matter, the "lien of the United States" referred to in § 7403(a) is that created by 26 U.S.C. § 6321, which provides:

"If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same after demand, the amount (including any interest, additional amount, addition to tax, or assessable penalty, together with any costs that may accrue in addition thereto) shall be a lien in favor of the United States upon all property and rights to property, whether real or personal, belonging to such person."

Section 7403, whose basic elements go back to revenue legislation passed in 1868 (§ 106 of the Act of July 20, 1868, ch. 186, 15 Stat. 125, 167) is one of a number of distinct enforcement tools available to the United States for the collection of delinquent taxes.3 The Government may, for example, simply sue for the unpaid amount, and, on getting a judgment, exercise the usual rights of a judgment creditor. See 26 U.S.C. §§ 6502(a), 7401, 7402(a). Yet a third route is administrative levy under 26 U.S.C. § 6331, which provides:

"If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same within 10 days after notice and demand, it shall be lawful for the Secretary or his delegate to collect such tax (and such further sum as shall be sufficient to cover the expenses of the levy) by levy upon all property and rights to property (except such property as is exempt under section 6334) belonging to such person or on which there is a lien provided in this chapter for the payment of such tax. . . ."

Administrative levy, unlike an ordinary lawsuit, and unlike the procedure described in § 7403, does not require any judicial intervention, and it is up to the taxpayer, if he so chooses, to go to court if he claims that the assessed amount was not legally owing. See generally Bull v. United States, 295 U.S. 247, 260, 55 S.Ct. 695, 699, 79 L.Ed. 1421 (1935).
- United States v. Rodgers, 461 U.S. 677, 682-683 (1983)

[GoldandSilverEagles]

Administrative levy, unlike an ordinary lawsuit, and unlike the procedure described in § 7403, does not require any judicial intervention, and it is up to the taxpayer, if he so chooses, to go to court if he claims that the assessed amount was not legally owing. See generally Bull v. United States, 295 U.S. 247, 260, 55 S.Ct. 695, 699, 79 L.Ed. 1421 (1935).
- United States v. Rodgers, 461 U.S. 677, 682-683 (1983)

Thank you for that bit of education. Now it is time verify the cases you provided, and if they check out as you claim, I will be sharing them with a few others. Now to see if the same ruling applies to Administrative Liens (??)
I'll have more for you later....

[Famspear]

Dear GoldandSilverEagles:

Yes, on liens and levies, the statutes -- and the United States Supreme Court -- all disagree with you. As you can see, your knowledge of how both liens and levies work was faulty.

For more information on the administrative levy -- the seizure of assets by the Internal Revenue Service -- check out the case of Brian v. Gugin. In this case, a group of taxpayers (including a Mr. Ralph Brian) sued a group of IRS and other government employees, (including Ms. Phylis Gugin), for what the taxpayers claimed was a violation of their rights. The following is an excerpt from the court’s decision in the case:

The plaintiffs' premise for their complaint is that the IRS agents were required to have a court order in order to be able to legally seize property for delinquent taxes. Unfortunately, this is a faulty premise. Title 26 U.S.C. §6331 authorizes the IRS to seize property of any person liable for any tax upon ten days notice. [ . . . ] The plaintiffs also cite 26 U.S.C. §7402 which grants jurisdiction to the district courts to issue orders, processes and judgments as well as enforce IRS summons. This section does not require a court order in order to levy on property under §6331.

A "levy" by definition is a summary non-judicial process which provides the IRS with prompt and convenient method for satisfying delinquent tax claims. [ . . . ] [T]he IRS has the option under §6502 to collect its assessment by ''either'' a levy or a court proceeding [ . . . . ]

Accordingly, the IRS agents were acting within the authority granted under §6331 and no court order was required for the attempted levy on Ralph Brian's property. Concerning the constitutional violations alleged by the plaintiffs, this court cannot find that any constitutional rights were allegedly violated if the attempted seizure was lawful under §6331.

It is important to note that the plaintiff Ralph Brian is not without a course of action under the Internal Revenue Code. If the delinquent taxes claimed are not delinquent, the taxpayer may bring an action with the IRS for a refund.

--from Brian v. Gugin, 853 F. Supp. 358, 94-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 50,278 (D. Idaho 1994), aff’d, 95-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 50,067 (9th Cir. 1995) (bolding added).

In a variation on this argument, some tax protesters have argued that section 6331 of the Internal Revenue Code should allow the IRS to seize only the salary of an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States or the District of Columbia. This argument was rejected by the United States Supreme Court in Sims v. United States, 359 U.S. 108 (1959). Tax protesters have presented variations of this argument, which the courts have ruled to be without legal merit. See, e.g., the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in James v. United States, 970 F.2d 750, 92-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 50,389, n. 9 (10th Cir. 1992). See also Peth v. Breitzmann, 611 F. Supp. 50, 85-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 9321 (E.D. Wis. 1985); Pawlowske v. Chrysler Corp., 623 F. Supp. 569, 86-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) ¶9392 (N.D. Ill. 1985); and Craig v. Lowe, 96-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 50,416 (N.D. Calif. 1996). See also the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Maisano v. Welcher, 940 F.2d 499, 91-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) paragr. 50,478 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. denied sub nom. Maisano v. IRS, 504 U.S. 916, 112 S. Ct. 1957 (1992) (Court ruled that no court order is required for a valid IRS seizure under section 6331, and that the power of IRS seizure under section 6331 is not limited to salaries of federal government personnel, etc).

Since at least 1867, the Federal tax collector has also held the power to sell property of a delinquent taxpayer to satisfy a Federal income tax liability, even before physically ejecting the taxpayer from the property. See the United States Supreme Court decision in the case of Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586 (1881) (sometimes cited as "1880"; decision actually rendered January 1881).

[GoldandSilverEagles]

Famspear , I appreciate the education/insights. I'm passing on what a local patriot group is touting about irs liens, levys...

If what you folks are saying checks out, I will pass the education on to them so they can stop operating from ignorance.

[The Operative]

Administrative levy, unlike an ordinary lawsuit, and unlike the procedure described in § 7403, does not require any judicial intervention, and it is up to the taxpayer, if he so chooses, to go to court if he claims that the assessed amount was not legally owing. See generally Bull v. United States, 295 U.S. 247, 260, 55 S.Ct. 695, 699, 79 L.Ed. 1421 (1935).
- United States v. Rodgers, 461 U.S. 677, 682-683 (1983)

Thank you for that bit of education. Now it is time verify the cases you provided, and if they check out as you claim, I will be sharing them with a few others. Now to see if the same ruling applies to Administrative Liens (??)
I'll have more for you later....

Which is why I provided five paragraphs from the decision which references a lien created by § 6321. Here is a link to United States v. Rodgers

[Nikki]

Then show me the court order, warrant, or judgements that precede irs notices of liens and levys.
Did you not read the code section I posted? The lien arises automatically. The IRS doesn't need any court order or any other action to notify the world that the lien exists.

The irs does not have the authority to make the legal determination that a law has been broken.
Who said anything about breaking any law? The issue is the automatic lien which arises when "any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same after demand"

The irs, just like any other agency of the federal government can make the allegation that a law has been broken, but it is the job of the courts and the responsibility of the courts to make that legal determination, via a court order, warrant, or judgment.
What law has been broken?

In an over simplication, if such was not the case, then people accused of "breaking the law" in the federal system wouldn;t be indicted for tax crimes.

There is a difference between violating civil statutes and criminal statutes.

If someone files properly, but doesn't pay the amount owed, that's a civil matter.

If someone doesn't file or files fraudulent returns, then they've "broken the law" and are subject to criminal sanctions.

If you want information, ask a question. Don't start off with absurd statements that clearly display your ignorance and then, later, pretend you were seeking information.

[GoldandSilverEagles]

If you want information, ask a question. Don't start off with absurd statements that clearly display your ignorance and then, later, pretend you were seeking information.

You are the one who is wrong. If you had bothered reading my last few replies, I was passing on info I'd learned through local patriot groups. I was not seeking anything. Label it ignorance or whatever else your pea brain is capable of imagining.

[Joey Smith]

Bull. There's nothing legal in their power of intimidation.They issue bogus "notices of lien" and don't back them by legally filing/registering the lien in Washington DC.

This "legal power to do these things without having to go to court" is a bunch of crap. Who else, but the irs, can issues bogus liens* and levies* (*issued without accompanying an appropriate court order, warrant, or judgment) and frighten the prostitute (an employer, a bank, etc) into surrendering property.

Even in the commercial world outside of the IRS, liens are not filed in one central location nationally, but rather with the local county clerk or recorder's office. Also, average folks who hold judgments against others can get the sheriff to go out and levy and execute on property, often without any court intervention at all.

Doubtless, many IRS employees wish that they could just go out and take assets willy-nilly without any notice or assessment, etc., but that's not the case. But so long as they follow the rules, and are patient, they will eventually get to the assets of non-payers.

Which highlights tax protestor's real problem, which is not the IRS's collection efforts, but the fact that the court reject 100% the totally idiotic arguments raised by tax protestors in their vain and misguided attempts to avoid the liability.

[Nikki]

If you want information, ask a question. Don't start off with absurd statements that clearly display your ignorance and then, later, pretend you were seeking information.

You are the one who is wrong. If you had bothered reading my last few replies, I was passing on info I'd learned through local patriot groups. I was not seeking anything. Label it ignorance or whatever else your pea brain is capable of imagining.

Bull crap. You're just trying to put a spin on

Bull. There's nothing legal in their power of intimidation.They issue bogus "notices of lien" and don't back them by legally filing/registering the lien in Washington DC.

This "legal power to do these things without having to go to court" is a bunch of crap. Who else, but the irs, can issues bogus liens* and levies* (*issued without accompanying an appropriate court order, warrant, or judgment) and frighten the prostitute (an employer, a bank, etc) into surrendering property.

It's organized crime similar to the mafia. It's no wonder they have been called the 'federal mafia'.

which doesn't look like "passing on info" unless your invisible friend is ghost-writing for you again. Face it. You got caught AGAIN and are now trying to wealel your way out of responsibility for yet antoher series of inane posts.