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

Re: [tips_and_tricks] IRS audit

Expand Messages
  • Don Schwarz
    Under the FIFTH amendment, you don t have to give any testimony against yourself. Why would you want to produce this evidence to be used only against you, not
    Message 1 of 21 , Feb 4, 2007


      Under the FIFTH amendment, you don't have
      to give any testimony against yourself.

      Why would you want to produce this evidence to
      be used only against you, not for you?

      Just show up. If you have intentionally committed
      a crime, they IRS has to prove this beyond
      reasonable doubt in a court of law where the jurors
      determine the law as well as the facts.



      At 04:42 PM 2/3/07 +0000, you wrote:

      I am unable to produce necessary records which date back to 1999.I
      face big liability according to accountant. Any advice???
    • Jim
      The law can not demand the impossible. If you can not produce the records, then how can a demand to do so make them appear? On the other hand, were you ever
      Message 2 of 21 , Feb 4, 2007
        The law can not demand the impossible. If you can not produce the
        records, then how can a demand to do so make them appear? On the other
        hand, were you ever ordered to keep books and records? Probably not.
        Also keep in mind that a tax liability is only incurred when there is
        an assessment according to the code, which most likely does not exist
        in your case. I know of no statute that allows for a self-assessment.
        Whatever the audit results in, make sure you've got the standard of an
        assessment according to the code and hold the IRS to it. Without it,
        there is no tax, no tax liability, and no taxpayer.

        --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "choicepoint111"
        <choicepoint111@...> wrote:
        >
        > I am unable to produce necessary records which date back to 1999.I
        > face big liability according to accountant. Any advice???
        >
      • ScrewieLo@AOL.com
        NOTICE THEM BY REGISTEDED MAIL THAT YOU WILL BE COMING IN WITH A COURT RECORDER AND A TAPE RECORDER. IF YOU HAVE TO GO IN PER ANY SUMMONS BRING YOUR PRIVATE
        Message 3 of 21 , Feb 4, 2007
          NOTICE THEM BY REGISTEDED MAIL THAT YOU WILL BE COMING IN WITH A COURT RECORDER AND A TAPE  RECORDER. IF YOU HAVE TO GO IN PER ANY SUMMONS BRING YOUR PRIVATE  BOOKS AND RECORDERS IN A LOCKED BOX. MARK THEM PRIVATE AND PUT A PRICE ON IT ($1,500 OR $ 10,000 WHAT EVER) .
           
           ASK THEM QUESTIONS :  LIKE DID THE Secretary of Treasury, Delegate them?  
                                                    can you see the delegation signed by the  Secretary of Treasury?
           
             do a AFFIDAVIT OF ERROR  hold them to it to rebutt it. here is an example  of which I did in my case.    
                                                   
        • Michael Noonan
          It has been a while since I have done IRS matter, so I do not have the cite handy. You are required to produce records, BUT you are NOT required to SHOW THEM!
          Message 4 of 21 , Feb 7, 2007
            It has been a while since I have done IRS matter, so
            I do not have the cite handy.

            You are required to produce records, BUT you are NOT
            required to SHOW THEM!

            If I can find that info, I will, but my material is
            in storage.

            mn

            Moderator/Bear: My understanding was that to "produce" had a legal meaning of "prepare for inspection." Rick Schramm tells about wrapping up a box and putting a skull and crossbones on the outside along with the words "open at your own risk." They set the box on the table and told the IRS agents, "Here are my records." The IRS agents refused to open the box! :-) I heard another story about someone that took actual phonograph records.
          • susanne waid
            Regarding producing records: A friend was summoned to IRS court to produce records. The friend told the judge that he had no books, papers & records
            Message 5 of 21 , Feb 7, 2007

              Regarding producing records:  A friend was summoned to IRS court to produce records.  The friend told the judge that he had no books, papers & records regarding the IRS. He was instructed by the judge to “invent” them.  At the subsequent hearing, the friend produced phonograph records, text books form the University of Wyoming & notes that he took while in class at U of WY.  The case was dismissed!!  Susanne Waid


              You are required to produce records, BUT you are NOT
              required to SHOW THEM!


              Moderator/Bear: My understanding was that to "produce" had a legal meaning of "prepare for inspection." Rick Schramm tells about wrapping up a box and putting a skull and crossbones on the outside along with the words "open at your own risk." They set the box on the table and told the IRS agents, "Here are my records." The IRS agents refused to open the box! :-) I heard another story about someone that took actual phonograph records.

            • one
              If you mean by show , you mean prove by your testimony. You are not required to testify or produce testimonial evidence. You are just required to attend the
              Message 6 of 21 , Feb 7, 2007
                If you mean by "show", you mean prove by your testimony. You are not
                required to testify or produce testimonial evidence.

                You are just required to attend the session of court.

                O
                n Wed, 2007-02-07 at 10:27 -0800, Michael Noonan wrote:
                > It has been a while since I have done IRS matter, so
                > I do not have the cite handy.
                >
                > You are required to produce records, BUT you are NOT
                > required to SHOW THEM!
              • Frog Farmer
                ... Is one whom the Secretary declined to give the statutory notice that he was required to keep books and records nonetheless required to keep them? What
                Message 7 of 21 , Feb 7, 2007
                  susanne waid [mailto:susannew@...] wrote:

                  > You are required to produce records, BUT you are NOT
                  > required to SHOW THEM!

                  Is one whom the Secretary declined to give the statutory notice that he
                  was required to keep books and records nonetheless required to keep
                  them? What kind of records, assuming that one is not "in business
                  effectively connected"? Of course I have many books and records, but I
                  doubt they'd be interested in Moby Dick or Electric Ladyland. I don't
                  want to assume anything against my best interests.

                  > Moderator/Bear: My understanding was that to "produce" had a legal
                  > meaning of "prepare for inspection." Rick Schramm tells about wrapping
                  > up a box and putting a skull and crossbones on the outside along with
                  > the words "open at your own risk." They set the box on the table and
                  > told the IRS agents, "Here are my records." The IRS agents refused to
                  > open the box! :-)

                  I've actually seen a similar situation, without the warning and
                  invitation to assume risk. The version I witnessed was the guy had a
                  box with whatever he imagined books and records meant. When they
                  extended their hands to get them, he said, "you said to bring them with
                  me. I did. Nothing says I have to turn them over to you absent a court
                  order." They terminated that hearing on another point entirely, that he
                  had three witnesses and they only wanted to admit two. Three are needed
                  to be witnesses at the common law. Nothing ever came of it ever again.

                  > I heard another story about someone that took actual
                  > phonograph records.

                  Actual phonograph records are too valuable to risk to those types
                  anymore. How about taking a few data CDs encrypted with PGP?? ;-)

                  Charge a fee for decoding, or swap for a complete decoding of your IMF!

                  Regards,

                  FF
                • Ed Siceloff
                  One could always bring one s personal copy of Merrill Jenkins book Everything I Have is TheIrs. I think that particular title would tell them what they want
                  Message 8 of 21 , Feb 7, 2007
                    One could always bring one's personal copy of Merrill Jenkins' book Everything I Have is TheIrs.  I think that particular title would tell them what they want to know. 
                     
                    Ed 
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:55 PM
                    Subject: RE: [tips_and_tricks] IRS audit

                    susanne waid [mailto:susannew@vcn. com] wrote:

                    > You are required to produce records, BUT you are NOT
                    > required to SHOW THEM!

                    Is one whom the Secretary declined to give the statutory notice that he
                    was required to keep books and records nonetheless required to keep
                    them? What kind of records, assuming that one is not "in business
                    effectively connected"? Of course I have many books and records, but I
                    doubt they'd be interested in Moby Dick or Electric Ladyland. I don't
                    want to assume anything against my best interests.

                    .

                  • John F. Worrell
                    yes I Lemar Hardin came up with that one and it works due to the ambiguousness of the tax code! code defined as deceit!! Blacks! ... From: susanne waid To:
                    Message 9 of 21 , Feb 7, 2007
                      yes I Lemar Hardin came up with that one and it works due to the ambiguousness of the tax code! code defined as deceit!! Blacks!
                       
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:29 PM
                      Subject: RE: [tips_and_tricks] IRS audit

                      Regarding producing records:  A friend was summoned to IRS court to produce records.  The friend told the judge that he had no books, papers & records regarding the IRS. He was instructed by the judge to “invent” them.  At the subsequent hearing, the friend produced phonograph records, text books form the University of Wyoming & notes that he took while in class at U of WY.  The case was dismissed!!  Susanne Waid


                      You are required to produce records, BUT you are NOT
                      required to SHOW THEM!


                      Moderator/Bear: My understanding was that to "produce" had a legal meaning of "prepare for inspection." Rick Schramm tells about wrapping up a box and putting a skull and crossbones on the outside along with the words "open at your own risk." They set the box on the table and told the IRS agents, "Here are my records." The IRS agents refused to open the box! :-) I heard another story about someone that took actual phonograph records.


                      No virus found in this incoming message.
                      Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                      Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007 5:52 PM
                    • mobinem@aol.com
                      Did you mean Royal LaMarr Hardy. You should tell the rest of the story. He is in prison. Please don t push something that will get others in trouble. John C.,
                      Message 10 of 21 , Feb 7, 2007
                        Did you mean Royal LaMarr Hardy. You should tell the rest of the story. He is in prison. Please don't push something that will get others in trouble.
                         


                        John C., of the family Stuart
                        623-206-4339
                        mobinem@...
                        c/o postal service location
                        21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
                        Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf

                        John C.: Stuart is a Sovereign natural flesh and blood man.
                        All rights reserved
                        Without Prejudice
                        Sovereign's confidentiality notice; This private email
                        message, including any attachment(s)is for the sole use
                        of the intended recipient and may contain privileged
                        and confidential information. Any/all political, private
                        or public entities, International, Federal, State, or
                        Local corporate government(s), private International
                        Organization(s) Municipality(ies), Corporate agent(s),
                        informant(s), investigator(s) et. al., and/or third party
                        (ies) working in collusion by monitoring my email(s), and
                        any other means of communication without my permission
                        are barred from any unauthorized review, use,
                        disclosure, or distribution. With explicit reservation of
                        all my rights, without prejudice and without recourse to
                        any of my rights. Any omission does not constitute a
                        waiver of any and/or all intellectual property rights or
                        reserved rights. Notice to Principal is notice to Agent,
                        Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal.

                        This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
                        and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. 
                        Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on
                        the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may
                        constitute a violation of law.  If you are not the intended
                        recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to
                        this e-mail, and delete the message from your system.  If you
                        have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender
                        immediately.
                      • Ed Siceloff
                        LaMarr went to prison for other reasons, which were not valid. He had won several cases based on his reliance defense. Taught many others to do the same.
                        Message 11 of 21 , Feb 8, 2007
                          LaMarr went to prison for other reasons, which were not valid.  He had won several cases based on his "reliance" defense.  Taught many others to do the same.  These people prosecuting him finally got him by not accepting any of his "evidence" as evidence--they railroaded him, after he and his organization taught many people to do the same, actually staying out of trouble. 
                            That would be adding some other facts to the story.  Upon my memory, he had been out and under an order to not teach the things that he was teaching.  They put him in prison because they construed something he had done as to be violating the conditions of his being "out." 
                           
                          Ed
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:47 PM
                          Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] IRS audit

                          Did you mean Royal LaMarr Hardy. You should tell the rest of the story. He is in prison. Please don't push something that will get others in trouble.
                           

                           
                          .

                        • John Marmora
                          I have a friend that was ordered to bring his records to tax court. He put magazines he collected into a paper bag, taped it shut and when the judge told him
                          Message 12 of 21 , Feb 8, 2007
                            I have a friend that was ordered to bring his records to tax court.
                            He put magazines he collected into a paper bag, taped it shut and when the judge told him to bring it forward to him, my friend dropped the package on the floor, put his foot on it and said "no, you come and take it". The judge said very sternly "I said bring it here". My friend repeated himself. The judge told him to get out of his coutrt. My friend was never called back.

                            John
                          • Frog Farmer
                            ... This is one reason I don t like Name Brand Law - people might think that just because you go to prison, you are incorrect on any legal theories you might
                            Message 13 of 21 , Feb 8, 2007
                              mobinem@... [mailto:mobinem@...] wrote:

                              > Did you mean Royal LaMarr Hardy. You should tell the rest of the
                              > story. He is in prison. Please don't push something that will get
                              > others in trouble.

                              This is one reason I don't like "Name Brand" Law - people might think
                              that just because you go to prison, you are incorrect on any legal
                              theories you might propound. The law was the law before Hardy or Schiff
                              or Elvick or Gordon or I came along. For some reason, every time
                              somebody new cracks a book and discovers the old obvious that's been
                              there forever, somebody else notices it and wants a seminar and a
                              package to implement. And so what that one researcher paid more
                              attention to gets the most attention, and the stuff he forgot to mention
                              goes unmentioned because the package buyers don't go far beyond the
                              boundaries of the package.

                              Then, after the packages have been sold, and the IRS or whomever is at
                              issue takes on a hard line in order to quell dissent and make a few
                              examples to cow the herd, the guy who was trying to help out by sharing
                              what he found gets labeled a loser and now his ideas are worth squat (to
                              those needing a leader).

                              I really don't think this country will be saved by a few trying to help
                              those who cannot be helped. I think everyone will have to defend
                              themselves, and the sooner a larger number become willing to do it, the
                              better for all. The Machine is already in a bad state and is choking.
                              I'm optimistic for the future because the series of events that I
                              thought would have to take decades is happening extremely quickly. But
                              no majority will ever notice it in my lifetime.

                              I've been thinking of producing a series of DVDs showing what I think
                              should be obvious to anyone, but for which people have been asking me
                              for years, "how do you do THAT?" I'd have to charge a lot for them of
                              course, and suffer being called a Paytriot For Profit, in the course of
                              trying to get the information to those who could really use it. I'd
                              expect lots of dissatisfaction too, to which I'd have to say, "so sorry!
                              - no refunds and no continuing support". Think I should move ahead with
                              it?


                              Regards,

                              FF
                            • gilbert london
                              I am retaining a former IRS agent to represent me at the audit. Good idea??? Messages in this topic (9)
                              Message 14 of 21 , Feb 8, 2007
                                I am retaining a former IRS agent to represent me at the audit. Good idea???



                                Any questions? Get answers on any topic at Yahoo! Answers. Try it now.

                              • mobinem@aol.com
                                I never said LeMarr was wrong in concept or intent. That whole record story is what I was trying to set the record straight on. John C., of the family Stuart
                                Message 15 of 21 , Feb 8, 2007
                                  I never said LeMarr was wrong in concept or intent. That whole record story is what I was trying to set the record straight on.
                                   


                                  John C., of the family Stuart
                                  623-206-4339
                                  mobinem@...
                                  c/o postal service location
                                  21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
                                  Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf

                                  John C.: Stuart is a Sovereign natural flesh and blood man.
                                  All rights reserved
                                  Without Prejudice
                                  Sovereign's confidentiality notice; This private email
                                  message, including any attachment(s)is for the sole use
                                  of the intended recipient and may contain privileged
                                  and confidential information. Any/all political, private
                                  or public entities, International, Federal, State, or
                                  Local corporate government(s), private International
                                  Organization(s) Municipality(ies), Corporate agent(s),
                                  informant(s), investigator(s) et. al., and/or third party
                                  (ies) working in collusion by monitoring my email(s), and
                                  any other means of communication without my permission
                                  are barred from any unauthorized review, use,
                                  disclosure, or distribution. With explicit reservation of
                                  all my rights, without prejudice and without recourse to
                                  any of my rights. Any omission does not constitute a
                                  waiver of any and/or all intellectual property rights or
                                  reserved rights. Notice to Principal is notice to Agent,
                                  Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal.

                                  This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
                                  and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. 
                                  Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on
                                  the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may
                                  constitute a violation of law.  If you are not the intended
                                  recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to
                                  this e-mail, and delete the message from your system.  If you
                                  have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender
                                  immediately.
                                • Ed Siceloff
                                  Just so nothing here is violated I will address merely making money from the publication of concepts. I reckon that there wouldn t be any Paytriots for Profit
                                  Message 16 of 21 , Feb 8, 2007
                                    Just so nothing here is violated I will address merely making money from the publication of concepts.  I reckon that there wouldn't be any Paytriots for Profit if everyone, or a majority of people at any rate, were not products of school systems designed to make them slaves and idiots, or just loyal wage earners content to consume the bounties that our Creator have put into the earth, and consume them in as vast of quantities as possible.  Freedom has become limited to consumer choice. 
                                      Absolutely anybody who has any concept in terms of our "real" freedom, and responsibilities, that are parts of our office as sort of regents of our King, the Creator, and how to live in various societies that are on earth today, as his regent, or steward, has my applause, if not my money.  I buy courses, seminars, etc.  Part of my extra-curricular education.  Then choose what I will use. 
                                      But, I also gravitate between two extremes on the scale of sharing with the world.  If what you have helps your fellow man in health, or freedom from slavery, it probably shouldn't be sold to him.  Grace is given, not freely, but rather by choice of the Creator Who is no respecter of person.  But, with that said, one also has to understand that the ox shouldn't be muzzled either, and is worth his grain.  The act of devoting one's time to learning certain concepts is the choice of devotion of a limited resource (time) and is a subject of economy (assignment of priority within scarcity).  There is no criticism from this quarter on selling courses most of the time.  If one has the ability, go for it. 
                                    ----- Original Message -----
                                    Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 11:23 AM
                                    Subject: RE: [tips_and_tricks] IRS audit



                                    I've been thinking of producing a series of DVDs showing what I think
                                    should be obvious to anyone, but for which people have been asking me
                                    for years, "how do you do THAT?" I'd have to charge a lot for them of
                                    course, and suffer being called a Paytriot For Profit, in the course of
                                    trying to get the information to those who could really use it. I'd
                                    expect lots of dissatisfaction too, to which I'd have to say, "so sorry!
                                    - no refunds and no continuing support". Think I should move ahead with
                                    it?

                                    Regards,

                                    FF

                                    .

                                  • Michael Noonan
                                    Fourth Amendment: The right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
                                    Message 17 of 21 , Feb 9, 2007
                                      Fourth Amendment: The right of people to be secure in
                                      their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
                                      unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
                                      violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon
                                      probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and
                                      particularly describing the place to be searched and
                                      the persons or things to be seized.

                                      Fifth Amendment: Rights against self-incrimination
                                      and of due process of law, not being compelled to be
                                      a witness against yourself.

                                      The IRS knows all about these rights, but that does
                                      not mean they will respect them. They can issue a
                                      summons for your private books and records, this is
                                      true, and you would have to produce them, as I said
                                      previously, but...

                                      You do not have to show them to anyone, nor do you
                                      have to submit them to anyone!

                                      IRS Tax Audit Guidelines - 242.12 books and Records of
                                      An Individual:

                                      (1) An individual taxpayer may refuse to exhibit his
                                      books and records for examination on the ground that
                                      compelling him to do so might violate his right
                                      against
                                      self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment and
                                      constitute an illegal search and seizure under the
                                      Fifth Amendment. However, IN ABSENCE OF SUCH A CLAIM,
                                      it is not error for the court to charge the jury that
                                      it may consider the refusal to produce books and
                                      records in determining willfulness.

                                      What you are telling the ITS is that you are
                                      protecting your due process right ageist self-
                                      incrimination. Having to show your books/records, the
                                      IRS will give any information gathered to the DOJ, and
                                      it may be possibly used against you. You cannot be
                                      compelled to be a witness against yourself.

                                      Now, if one wants to use theatrics in the process, as
                                      described in a few instances, fine, but at least you
                                      will know the basis for how you can proceed with
                                      confidence.

                                      Cheers!

                                      mn



                                      ____________________________________________________________________________________
                                      We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love
                                      (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
                                      http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265
                                    • Henry Bunbury
                                      Ask the Revenue Officer to substantiate the Secretary s discretionary Notice. If you are presumed to be a wage earner, you need to pursue the issuer of the
                                      Message 18 of 21 , Feb 9, 2007
                                        Ask the Revenue Officer to substantiate the Secretary's discretionary Notice.

                                        If you are presumed to be a wage earner, you need to pursue the issuer of the collection of information that were received by the Agency under the presumption of correctness.

                                        You need to inquire of the Commissioner if  the agency has a record of its determination issued to the American Employer that there exists the employer employee relationship.  Without that record, the agency is moving a naked assessment as it presumptively received collections of information are violation of federal agency records management..

                                        The solution is to pursue a correction of the administrative record by legally coercing the American Employer to send out corrected collection of information.  The improper issuance of collection of information by the payor arise as a civil fraud.

                                        The Commissioner relies upon this civil fraud to initiate its collection activities under the presumption oc what else, correctness.

                                        Besides how may the revenue office demand that you confess?  The only way for the revenue officer to demand books and records, is that you have been lawfully notice of a legal obligation accruing under Subtitle A.  Why Subtitle A, for the Employer is liable for all Subtitle C takings.


                                        ----- Original Message ----
                                        From: choicepoint111 <choicepoint111@...>
                                        To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                                        Sent: Saturday, February 3, 2007 11:42:57 AM
                                        Subject: [tips_and_tricks] IRS audit

                                        I am unable to produce necessary records which date back to 1999.I
                                        face big liability according to accountant. Any advice???




                                        Never Miss an Email
                                        Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started!
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.