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

Individual Master File errors a due process problem

Expand Messages
  • Legalbear
    It would also seem that a summary proceeding in a Collection Due Process Hearing would also violate due process under what the court says in paragraphs 25-26
    Message 1 of 2 , Aug 8, 2010

      It would also seem that a summary proceeding in a Collection Due Process Hearing would also violate due process under what the court says in paragraphs 25-26 below, in other words, the mere fact you get to raise your issues summarily denied, and not seriously considered by the hearing officer in the due process hearing, is also to little too late for similar reasons.


      [23]       "As the case comes to us, the [IRS] made use of evidence [consisting of Individual Master File entries] of which [alleged taxpayer] may have been unaware, and which he had no chance to answer: a prime requirement of any fair hearing." United States v. Balogh, 157 F.2d 939, 943, judgment vacated on other grounds, 329 U.S. 692.


      [24]       See also Brewer v. United States, 211 F.2d 864 (C. A. 4th Cir. 1954).


      [25]       So basic, indeed, is this "prime requirement of any fair hearing" that counsel for the Government contended for the first time in oral argument that the rights of the registrant were amply protected by the provision in the regulations for a mode of "rehearing." In short, the argument is that after the Appeal Board decides against the registrant and his file is returned to the local Board, he has the right under the selective service regulations to examine all information in his file, including the recommendation of the Department, 32 CFR § 1606.32 (a)(1); 32 CFR § 1606.38 (c). The registrant would then have a right to request a reopening of his classification, 32 CFR § 1625.1 (a); 32 CFR § 1625.2, if he submitted "proof of error in documents submitted to the appeal board by the Department of Justice."*fn7 Moreover, he may present his contentions to the Director of Selective Service or the State Director of Selective Service, requesting a reopening of his classification or a reconsideration by the Appeal Board, 32 CFR § 1625.3 (a); 32 CFR § 1626.61 (a).


      [ 348 U.S. Page 417]


                  We believe these remedies to be too little and too late. Too little, because the right to present petitioner's side of the case is broader than the bare right to correct "errors" made by the Department in its recommendation. Too late, because, except with the permission of the national or state Director, only the local Board may reopen the case; and a certain reluctance is to be expected after the Appeal Board, albeit on incomplete presentation, has rejected the registrant's claim. Moreover, the local Board has discretion to refuse to reopen the case if it "is of the opinion that the information accompanying such request fails to present any facts in addition to those considered when the registrant was classified or, even if new facts are presented, the local board is of the opinion that such facts, if true, would not justify a change in such registrant's classification . . . ." 32 CFR § 1625.4.


      [26]       We hold that the over-all procedures set up in the statute and regulations, designed to be "fair and just" in their operation, 62 Stat. 605, 50 U. S. C. App. § 451 (c), require that the registrant receive a copy of the Justice Department's recommendation and be given a reasonable opportunity to file a reply thereto. Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Appeals, upholding petitioner's conviction for refusing to submit to induction, is


      [27]       Reversed.


      GONZALES v. UNITED STATES, 1955.SCT.40337 <http://www.versuslaw.com>¶ 23-27; 348 U.S. 407 (1955).


      Phone Contact: 720-675-7230

      Best times to call: 8:30 am-9:00 pm MST

      Bear's Pages: www.irsterminator.com www.legalbears.com www.legalbearsblog.com

      www.irslienthumper.com www.irslevythumper.com www.irs-armory.com www.freedivorceforms.net

      www.cantheydothat.com (a free lien evaluation) www.trafficrocketblog.com Send an email to:

      tips_and_tricks-subscribe@yahoogroups.com to join Tips & Tricks for Court Group


      *YES BUT... The IRS does not care about such stuff. Moderator/Bear: It s our job to make them care! I have often said, they are not going exercise their
      Message 2 of 2 , Aug 8, 2010
        *YES BUT...

        The IRS does not care about such stuff.

        Moderator/Bear: It's our job to make them care! I have often said, they are not going exercise their discretion on your behalf unless they're feeling some personal jeopardy.

        They know that most of their victims cannot afford long court battles.

        Moderator/Bear: It is our job to apply some creative thinking, some prayer, some inspiration, some application of Scriptural principles to solve the problem in the same amount of time it took them to create the problem. If it took them 20 minutes to write a ticket, we should solve it in 20 minutes. If it took them an hour to prepare a 2039 pocket summons, it should be our goal resolve the problem in one hour as well.

        Most don't even go to Tax Court.

        Moderator/Bear: It is our job to recognize that we are being funneled into Tax Court by a denial of due process of law. We were never given an opportunity to controvert their finding that we were taxpayers with income. They did that with a computer entry, we should solve it with a computer entry; same amount of time. Again, that should be our goal. We have to execute on the principle set out in Job 22:28, "You shall also decide and decree a thing, and it shall be established for you; and the light of Jahuwah shall shine upon your ways." The point of this Scripture being: we decree that we shall solve it quickly with a minimum of effort and expenditure of resources and Jahuwah will show us how to accomplish the decree.

        They can count on the great majority of people rolling over and playing dead after a decent try at a C(ollection)D(ue)P(rocess) hearing.

        Moderator/Bear: It is hard to be on the treadmill and pursue, or pay someone to pursue, all of your legal remedies. Aren't you the same guy that was trying to get millions of people to stop filing?

        The IRS SAYS that Supreme Court rulings are the law of the land, but they regularly ignore them in hearings.

        Moderator/Bear: Again, if they do that it should be turned into a source of jeopardy for them under § 1203 of Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998. Nobody wants to go through the nightmare of losing their good paying job at the IRS.

        They recognize lower federal court rulings only within the
        jurisdictions of those specific courts and not nationwide, and even then not usually until a case rises to the level of court instead of mere hearings.

        Moderator/Bear: And of course, they use Tax Court decisions as precedence. The way they line those up can be very intimidating unless you recognize it as a form of extortion.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.