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

Rebutting W-2s and 1099s

Expand Messages
  • Woodboy
    ... Yes, the original W-2 and 1099 must be challenged and the underlying presumptions rebutted. I disagree that the Form 4852 or a corrected 1099 is
    Message 1 of 12 , Jun 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      This I have done and am now obliged to respond to frivolous return charges, while they plod ahead and send me their figures of what they say I "owe" in taxes. What can one say to that?

      The W-2 and 1099 must be rebutted. The way to rebut the W-2 is with a 4852.
      The way to rebut the 1099 is to fill out a new blank one stating the actual
      amount of wages ($0.00) you received, then at the top of the form mark it as
      "CORRECTED". This is your admissable credible evidence.

      Yes, the original W-2 and 1099 must be challenged and the underlying presumptions rebutted.

      I disagree that the Form 4852 or a "corrected" 1099 is admissible or credible. Only the trier of law decides whether a document is admissible and only the trier of fact decides credibility. The Form 4852 or a "corrected" 1099 only opens the door to dispute. Additional evidence is necessary.

      Yes, there then exists two opposing documents. But the administrative thieves believe they possess standing to decide which document carries more weight and they always side with their presumption that the original document is correct and is evidence of gross income subject to taxation.

      Because the original documents are produced by third parties with no direct interest in the dispute and the rebutting Form 4852 and "corrected" 1099 is produced by a first party with a direct interest in the outcome, the rebuttal effort is considered self-serving and ex parte. That is why the thieves easily ignore the rebuttal effort.

      The key is not to argue "did not" but to directly challenge the existing documents.
    • Circuitman
      Yes, I am coming to that realization. I believe it proper to challenge the authenticity of the issued W2 s and 1099 s since all they have are transcripts and
      Message 2 of 12 , Jun 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Yes, I am coming to that realization. I believe it proper to challenge the "authenticity" of the issued W2's and 1099's since all they have are transcripts and not the originals, including the original W3's. However, will they not just get another one from the original issuer, or could that be considered "after the fact?"

        Thanks...


        At 03:52 PM 6/1/2006 -0500, you wrote:
        The key is not to argue "did not" but to directly challenge the existing documents.



        Dan the CircuitMan

        CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE - This e-mail communication is intended for the sole use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited, unless otherwise authorized herein. Access to this e-mail by any other person/entity is unauthorized.

      • Woodboy
        ... I have observed that the thieves will request a facsimile copy of the W-2/1099, but not the original W-3/1096. The facsimile copy will not be signed
        Message 3 of 12 , Jun 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Yes, I am coming to that realization. I believe it proper to challenge the "authenticity" of the issued W2's and 1099's since all they have are transcripts and not the originals, including the original W3's. However, will they not just get another one from the original issuer, or could that be considered "after the fact?"

          I have observed that the thieves will request a facsimile copy of the W-2/1099, but not the original W-3/1096. The facsimile copy will not be signed pursuant to sections 6061/6065. The facsimile copies will not be accompanied with statements that the information is true, complete, and correct; nor with any statement that the information is derived from personal knowledge; nor any statement that the data is derived during the normal course of business (to satisfy rule 803(6)). Thus, to authenticate the documents in litigation, the thieves' attorney will have to subpoena the custodian (the only competent fact witness) at trial. They often do not subpoena these people (sometimes they do, but then you get to cross-examine and attempt to impeach that testimony), but most people do not know the rules of evidence sufficiently to then challenge the authenticity of the facsimile document. If there is no witness with personal knowledge then theoretically those documents should be inadmissible.

          Facsimile documents are acceptable as evidence pursuant to rules 1001-1004, but the person trying to admit such evidence must provide evidence that the original documents do not exist and they were not lost due to bad faith. The IRS attorney is not a material witness so do not let that scumbag utter such statements under the pretense and guise of testimony. Object timely.

          The "after the fact" issue is interesting. Because the facsimile document represents underlying computer data, judges tend to accept those documents as long as somebody with personal knowledge authenticates the document and the underlying computer data entry process. In fairness, this all makes sense. However, that the original documents do not exist raises the disturbing issue that a NOD was issued without existing facts in evidence. So in essence, yes, the thieves are attempting to create their case after the fact.

          Just my opinion and IANAL.
        • Woodboy
          ... Yes, the original W-2 and 1099 must be challenged and the underlying presumptions rebutted. I disagree that the Form 4852 or a corrected 1099 is
          Message 4 of 12 , Jun 2, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            This I have done and am now obliged to respond to frivolous return charges, while they plod ahead and send me their figures of what they say I "owe" in taxes. What can one say to that?

            The W-2 and 1099 must be rebutted. The way to rebut the W-2 is with a 4852.
            The way to rebut the 1099 is to fill out a new blank one stating the actual
            amount of wages ($0.00) you received, then at the top of the form mark it as
            "CORRECTED". This is your admissable credible evidence.

            Yes, the original W-2 and 1099 must be challenged and the underlying presumptions rebutted.

            I disagree that the Form 4852 or a "corrected" 1099 is admissible or credible. Only the trier of law decides whether a document is admissible and only the trier of fact decides credibility. The Form 4852 or a "corrected" 1099 only opens the door to dispute. Additional evidence is necessary.

            Yes, there then exists two opposing documents. But the administrative thieves believe they possess standing to decide which document carries more weight and they always side with their presumption that the original document is correct and is evidence of gross income subject to taxation.

            Because the original documents are produced by third parties with no direct interest in the dispute and the rebutting Form 4852 and "corrected" 1099 is produced by a first party with a direct interest in the outcome, the rebuttal effort is considered self-serving and ex parte. That is why the thieves easily ignore the rebuttal effort.

            The key is not to argue "did not" but to directly challenge the existing documents.
          • JD
            I have a question. How is the W-2 sent to the IRS? In what format or what form is used to transmit the W-2 to the IRS? Thanks ... From: Woodboy This I have
            Message 5 of 12 , Jun 2, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              I have a question.  How is the W-2 sent to the IRS?  In what format or what form is used to transmit the W-2 to the IRS?  Thanks
               
               
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: Woodboy

              This I have done and am now obliged to respond to frivolous return charges, while they plod ahead and send me their figures of what they say I "owe" in taxes. What can one say to that?

              The W-2 and 1099 must be rebutted. The way to rebut the W-2 is with a 4852. The way to rebut the 1099 is to fill out a new blank one stating the actual
              amount of wages ($0.00) you received, then at the top of the form mark it as "CORRECTED". This is your admissable credible evidence.

            • Woodboy
              ... I cannot say for sure. The old method was to bundle all the W-2s and attach a W-3 transmittal form. The W-3 contained a jurat signed under penalty of
              Message 6 of 12 , Jun 2, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                At 6/2/2006 12:51 PM, you wrote:
                I have a question.  How is the W-2 sent to the IRS?  In what format or what form is used to transmit the W-2 to the IRS?  Thanks

                I cannot say for sure. The old method was to bundle all the W-2s and attach a W-3 transmittal form. The W-3 contained a jurat signed under penalty of perjury that the information was true, complete, and correct. Arguably that W-3 satisfied the requirements of section 6061 and 6065 and the nominal rules of evidence.

                I suspect today, at least for larger corporations and companies, that the documents are submitted electronically. Thus, I have to wonder how the W-3 is signed to satisfy sections 6061 and 6065.

                I am reasonably certain that regardless of how the documents are submitted these days that once the data is moved into the IRS computers system that the original W-2/W-3 documents are destroyed. I presume this because when people ask for copies of the original documents they are told the documents do not exist and instead they are sent computer print-outs or are told to request a duplicate copy from the original payer.

                If these original documents do not exist then I think this raises some serious and interesting challenges with the rules of evidence. Just my opinion and IANAL.
              • Circuitman
                W2 s are not sent directly to the IRS. As I understand the process, the company issuing the W2 for each employee sends all W2 s at one time with a W3. The W3
                Message 7 of 12 , Jun 2, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  W2's are not sent directly to the IRS. As I understand the process, the company issuing the W2 for each "employee" sends all W2's at one time with a W3. The W3 is called "Transmittal of Wage and Tax Statements" and contains the signature of the company representative under a jurat, testifying to its accuracy. However, the W3 instructs the issuer to send them to the Social Security Administration, not to the IRS. The IRS most likely gets a computer transcript from SSA for all W2's, which would be why they can't produce the original. What SSA does with the original W2's and W3 is unknown, but they may destroy it after entering the data as the IRS does.

                  When I requested all copies of W2's and 1099's from the IRS with form 4506T they sent transcripts of the W2's but a copy of the original 1099. It could be because there were no taxes withheld for the amount paid.

                  Dan



                  At 12:51 PM 6/2/2006 -0500, you wrote:
                  I have a question.  How is the W-2 sent to the IRS?  In what format or what form is used to transmit the W-2 to the IRS?  Thanks

                  Dan the CircuitMan

                  CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE - This e-mail communication is intended for the sole use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited, unless otherwise authorized herein. Access to this e-mail by any other person/entity is unauthorized.

                • Woodboy
                  ... This response raises the same issues of evidence that I have been raising. The documents you received are not signed pursuant to sections 6061 and 6065.
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jun 2, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    At 6/2/2006 02:29 PM, you wrote:
                    W2's are not sent directly to the IRS. As I understand the process, the company issuing the W2 for each "employee" sends all W2's at one time with a W3. The W3 is called "Transmittal of Wage and Tax Statements" and contains the signature of the company representative under a jurat, testifying to its accuracy. However, the W3 instructs the issuer to send them to the Social Security Administration, not to the IRS. The IRS most likely gets a computer transcript from SSA for all W2's, which would be why they can't produce the original. What SSA does with the original W2's and W3 is unknown, but they may destroy it after entering the data as the IRS does.

                    When I requested all copies of W2's and 1099's from the IRS with form 4506T they sent transcripts of the W2's but a copy of the original 1099. It could be because there were no taxes withheld for the amount paid.

                    This response raises the same issues of evidence that I have been raising. The documents you received are not signed pursuant to sections 6061 and 6065. The transcripts (computer-print-outs) cannot be authenticated. The copy of the 1099 cannot be authenticated. None of the documents are accompanied with any testimony from a custodian with personal knowledge that the amounts reported are wages or gross income subject to taxation. None of these documents are testified as to being true, complete, and correct. None of these documents are accompanied with testimony that the original copies no longer exist and were not lost in bad faith.

                    These documents are hearsay and none of the hearsay exemptions apply. Without testimony from a person with personal knowledge that the original documents were not lost due to bad faith, the documents do not satisfy the facsimile copy exceptions to the rules of evidence.

                    None of these documents should be admissible as evidence. Without admissible evidence, the thieves can proceed to issue a NOD based only upon presumption and not facts in evidence.
                  • JD
                    If what you are saying is true, then why does one have to attach a W-2 with a return? ... From: Circuitman W2 s are not sent directly to the IRS. As I
                    Message 9 of 12 , Jun 2, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      If what you are saying is true, then why does one have to attach a W-2 with a return?
                       
                       
                      ----- Original Message -----

                      W2's are not sent directly to the IRS. As I understand the process, the company issuing the W2 for each "employee" sends all W2's at one time with a W3. The W3 is called "Transmittal of Wage and Tax Statements" and contains the signature of the company representative under a jurat, testifying to its accuracy. However, the W3 instructs the issuer to send them to the Social Security Administration, not to the IRS. The IRS most likely gets a computer transcript from SSA for all W2's, which would be why they can't produce the original. What SSA does with the original W2's and W3 is unknown, but they may destroy it after entering the data as the IRS does.

                      When I requested all copies of W2's and 1099's from the IRS with form 4506T they sent transcripts of the W2's but a copy of the original 1099. It could be because there were no taxes withheld for the amount paid.

                      Dan


                    • Woodboy
                      ... 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
                      Message 10 of 12 , Jun 3, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        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.
                      • Gene Johnson
                        How is the W-2 sent to the IRS, You send it. I am one of those mean old employer s that, rather than go to jail like Dick Simkanan did, I send in the
                        Message 11 of 12 , Jun 3, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          How is the W-2 sent to the IRS, You send it.
                           
                          I am one of those mean old employer's that, rather than go to jail like Dick Simkanan did, I send in the "required" W-2 forms.
                           
                          (If you are not familiar with Dick Simkanan, he did not send in withholding taxes for his employees and the judge had to lie to the jury to get him convicted. A judge lying to the jury always works.)
                           
                          Copy A- goes to Social Security Administration
                          Copy B- to be filed with employee's federal tax return
                          Copy C- for employee's records
                          Copy D- stayes with employer
                          Copy 1- employer sends to state tax department with states yearly tax form for employers
                          Copy 2- is filed with employee's state tax return
                          The W-3 that Woodboy refers to is sent to social security adm. and yes, I sign it under penalties of perjury. Notice penalties is plural. The W-3 is a Transmittal of Wage and Tax Statements. W-2's for all employee's are sent with one W-3.
                           
                          So the IRS gets your W-2 from YOU. The employer does not send a W-2 to the IRS.
                           
                          My business is small with only 20-40 W-2's per year, so I send them paper.
                           
                           
                          Gene Johnson

                          Woodboy <woodboy@...> wrote:
                          At 6/2/2006 12:51 PM, you wrote:
                          I have a question.  How is the W-2 sent to the IRS?  In what format or what form is used to transmit the W-2 to the IRS?  Thanks

                          I cannot say for sure. The old method was to bundle all the W-2s and attach a W-3 transmittal form. The W-3 contained a jurat signed under penalty of perjury that the information was true, complete, and correct. Arguably that W-3 satisfied the requirements of section 6061 and 6065 and the nominal rules of evidence.

                          I suspect today, at least for larger corporations and companies, that the documents are submitted electronically. Thus, I have to wonder how the W-3 is signed to satisfy sections 6061 and 6065.

                          I am reasonably certain that regardless of how the documents are submitted these days that once the data is moved into the IRS computers system that the original W-2/W-3 documents are destroyed. I presume this because when people ask for copies of the original documents they are told the documents do not exist and instead they are sent computer print-outs or are told to request a duplicate copy from the original payer.

                          If these original documents do not exist then I think this raises some serious and interesting challenges with the rules of evidence. Just my opinion and IANAL.


                          Ring'em or ping'em. Make PC-to-phone calls as low as 1¢/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

                        • Kari
                          I was an Office Manager for over 8 years for the same company and I can assure you that all W-3 Transmittals along with the W-2 forms are always first sent to
                          Message 12 of 12 , Jun 7, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I was an Office Manager for over 8 years for the same company and I
                            can assure you that all W-3 Transmittals along with the W-2 forms are
                            always first sent to the SSA. SSA then forwards this same package on
                            to the IRS. The IRS always has an original W-2 directly from the
                            employer by way of the SSA. Any time a worker files an income tax
                            return and attaches his W-2 form to his 1040, that is the second W-2
                            form the IRS receives on behalf of that worker. This same event
                            happens with all 1099 forms. They are processed in exactly the same
                            manner as the W-3's and the W-2's.

                            It is vital that the SSA and the IRS receive both the W-3 Transmittal
                            signed under penalties of perjury by the employer along with the
                            W-2's that accompany the W-3. Both the IRS and the SSA will use the
                            W-3 sworn statement of the employer as there evidence that the worker
                            had income and the fact that the worker has a Social Security number
                            or a TIN. This is the evidence they use to determine a workers
                            liability and used against a worker in any tax court or income tax case.

                            Do not be mistaken about the W-2 or 1099 both of these forms are
                            submitted with a sworn statement form W-3 Transmittal of Wage and Tax
                            Statements attaches to the front of all W-2' and Form 1096 Annual
                            Summary & Transmittal attaches to the front of all 1099's, from the
                            employer directly to the SSA and then forwarded on by the SSA to the
                            IRS. All are sworn to under Penalties of Perjury.

                            Gene Johnson, is correct in the fact that if an employer has a TIN
                            that employer is required by law to submit the above mentioned
                            Transmittals and Forms to SSA who records the information into their
                            data base and then forwards them on to the IRS to be placed in their
                            data base.

                            The law can be found in the Social Security Act, which is under title
                            42 not in title 26 (where you would expect to find it). After reading
                            the Social Security Act many of my questions about the law "which
                            makes a person liable", were answered. Any one who has a Social
                            Security Number or a TIN is bound by the Act to comply.

                            The Social Security Act states in pertinant part:

                            TITLE VIII- TAXES WITH RESPECT TO EMPLOYMENT

                            INCOME TAX ON EMPLOYEES

                            SECTION 801. In addition to other taxes, there shall be levied,
                            collected, and paid upon the income of every individual a tax equal to
                            the following percentages of the wages (as defined in section 811)
                            received by him after December 31, 1936, with respect to employment
                            (as defined in section 811) after such date: (1) With respect to
                            employment during the calendar years 1937, 1938, and 1939, the rate
                            shall be 1 per centum. (2) With respect to employment during the
                            calendar years 1940, 1941, and 1942, the rate shall 1 ´ per centum.
                            (3) With respect to employment during the calendar years 1943, 1944,
                            and 1945, the rate shall be 2 per centum. (4) With respect to
                            employment during the calendar years 1946, 1947, and 1948, the rate
                            shall be 2 ´ per centum. (5) With respect to employment after December
                            31, 1948, the rate shall be 3 per centum.

                            DEDUCTION OF TAX FROM WAGES

                            SEC. 802. (a) The tax imposed by section 801 shall be collected by the
                            employer of the taxpayer by deducting the amount of the tax from the
                            wages as and when paid. Every employer required so to deduct the tax
                            is hereby made liable for the payment of such tax, and is hereby
                            indemnified against the claims and demands of any person for the
                            amount of any such payment made by such employer.

                            (b) If more or less than the correct amount of tax imposed by section
                            801 is paid with respect to any wage payment, then, under regulations
                            made under this title, proper adjustments, with respect both to the
                            tax and the amount to be deducted, shall be made, without interest, in
                            connection with subsequent wage payments to the same individual by the
                            same employer.

                            DEDUCTIBILITY FROM INCOME TAX

                            SEC. 803. For the purposes of the income tax imposed by Title I of the
                            Revenue Act of 1934 or by any Act of Congress in substitution
                            therefor, the tax imposed by section 801 shall not be allowed as a
                            deduction to the taxpayer in computing his net income for the year in
                            which such tax is deducted from his wages.

                            EXCISE TAX ON EMPLOYERS

                            SEC. 804. In addition to other taxes, every employer shall pay an
                            excise tax, with respect to having individuals in his employ, equal to
                            the following percentages of the wages (as defined in section 811)
                            paid by him after December 31, 1936, with respect to employment (as
                            defined in section 811) after such date: (1) With respect to
                            employment during the calendar years 1937, 1938, and 1939, the rate
                            shall be 1 per centum. (2) With respect to employment during the
                            calendar years 1940, 1941, and 1942, the rate shall be 1 ´ per centum.
                            (3) With respect to employment during the calendar years 1943, 1944,
                            and 1945, the rate shall be 2 per centum. (4) With respect to
                            employment during the calendar years 1946, 1947, and 1948, the rate
                            shall be 2 ´ per centum. (5) With respect to employment after December
                            31, 1948, the rate shall be 3 per centum.

                            --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, Gene Johnson <genejohn70@...>
                            wrote:
                            >
                            > How is the W-2 sent to the IRS, You send it.
                            >
                            > I am one of those mean old employer's that, rather than go to jail
                            like Dick Simkanan did, I send in the "required" W-2 forms.
                            >
                            > (If you are not familiar with Dick Simkanan, he did not send in
                            withholding taxes for his employees and the judge had to lie to the
                            jury to get him convicted. A judge lying to the jury always works.)
                            >
                            > Copy A- goes to Social Security Administration
                            > Copy B- to be filed with employee's federal tax return
                            > Copy C- for employee's records
                            > Copy D- stayes with employer
                            > Copy 1- employer sends to state tax department with states yearly
                            tax form for employers
                            > Copy 2- is filed with employee's state tax return
                            >
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.