Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

11242Re: [tips_and_tricks] Rebutting W-2s and 1099s

Expand Messages
  • Woodboy
    Jun 3, 2006
      At 6/2/2006 04:16 PM, you wrote:
      If what you are saying is true, then why does one have to attach a W-2 with a return?

      Self-incrimination.

      Actually, if one tries to explain this process from a legal perspective:

      The IRS thieves receive a statement from a third party, either directly (1099s) or indirectly from the SSA (W-2s). Because of the sloppy and confusing manner in which the IRC is written, these statements are presumed to be reporting wages or gross income subject to taxation. Loosely, from a legal action perspective, these documents are similar to a complaint or accusation. The information return is an allegation.

      To ensure "due process," the third party is required to send a copy of that document to the "accused" or directly affected party. Through that effort notice is served of the allegations.

      Now, much like a civil action, the accused must respond to the allegations. If the accused responds simply by filing a tax return along with a copy of the accusing documents, the thieves do not stop to investigate the IRC to see if all the facts are correct. The thieves presume the parties know what they are doing. Additionally, much like any legal action, any allegation not disputed is deemed accepted, whether or not true.

      The next question to arise is how a person should dispute these allegations. That is the $64,000 question that many people lately have been trying to solve. The IRS thieves refuse to abide by any procedure that loosely resembles meaningful due process. In a typical civil action, a responding party does not jump immediately into trial to produce or impeach evidence, but simply responds to the complaint with responses of "affirm," "deny," or "without sufficient knowledge to form a response." Thereafter the judge and the enjoined parties proceed to trial to produce, impeach, sift, and weigh evidence.

      But the IRS administrative thieves refuse to abide by anything so reasonable. If the administrative procedure proceeded similarly to a civil action, then the next step after a rebuttal would be for the IRS thieves to proceed to an administrative investigation. After a rebuttal, the thieves possess two sets of opposing documents that creates a "did too, did not" conversation. Who to believe?

      In any legal action the initial burden of proof rests with the party making the claim and filing the complaint. Because the third party is the party issuing the allegation that the amounts reported are subject to taxation, that party needs to be the first party to move forward to validate the claim. This never happens. The IRS thieves do not operate in this manner. They instead prefer to proceed based upon presumption and stubbornly insist that the third party is correct. The thieves ignore any rebuttal effort.

      The alleged reason for allowing this presumptive process is that all the political thieves involved in this process---legislators, judges, bureaucrats, etc.---believe that tax collection must proceed in as efficient manner as possible. This might make sense for many other types of taxes where there is little dispute about the nature of the confiscation. But with respect to taxes on incomes, and especially when third parties are involved initiating allegations, this foundational reason seems to crumble under its own weight.

      Further confusion arises because nobody involved within the political process wants to come clean and explain the nature of the income tax. Add a tax code that is just that---a code that nobody understands fully---and the stage is set for anger, hostility, frustration, deception, and confusion.

      The problem today, however, is that people are scrambling trying to figure out how to overcome this presumptive process that never benefits the alleged taxpayer.
    • Show all 12 messages in this topic