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

Internal Revenue Service is debt collector for the Inte...

Expand Messages
  • Bob Conlon
    Bob, good observation about the elimination of district directors but then you go on to say this:  No laws and regulations exist to provide for other entities
    Message 1 of 16 , Nov 3, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Bob, good observation about the elimination of district directors but then you go on to say this:�

      No laws and regulations exist to provide for other entities to assume these functions.

      This is actually not true. When the�IRS�got rid of the position,� they did�it illegally. It was illegal because�RRA98, the very law they used as an excuse to eliminate the position, actually established a statutory requirement for the position to exist!

      In section 3445 of Public Law 105-206 you'll find the statutory requirement.

      Go here and search for 3445: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=105_cong_bills&docid=f:h2676enr.txt.pdf

      At paragraph (b)�of that section, read the amendment to�Section 6334(e) and you'll find�it.


      This is clear evidence of the "entity formerly known as the IRS" lawbreaking.� Why do we let�them get away with this?�


      The fraud is much bigger than just this cancellation.� The original TO 150-06 was issued in 1953 without authority.

      Canvassing for taxes owed and collection of taxes is the responsibility of district directors and directors of Regional Service Centers, but the districts, service centers and their directors were disestablished in 2001.  No laws and regulations exist to provide for other entities to assume these functions.
    • BOB GREGORY
      *Good information, Bob C. Basically, as I understand this law and law in general, PL 105-206 makes the issuance of TO 150-02 of March 2001 comprehensible and
      Message 2 of 16 , Nov 3, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Good information, Bob C.

        Basically, as I understand this law and law in general, PL 105-206 makes the issuance of TO 150-02 of March 2001 comprehensible and the issuance of TO 150-02 of May 2006 (which canceled TO 150-02 of March 2001) incomprehensible.  The reason for issuance of the cancellation of the earlier TO 150-02 of March 2001 was cited as Treasury Directive 21-01  of August 1999. (So why, if an earlier basis for cancellation existed, was TO 150-02 of March 2001 issued in the first place?)  However nothing UN-CANCELED the earlier 150-01 of September 1995 which contained the designations of districts. 

        Regardless of this, regulations still exist requiring performance of certain functions by district directors and directors of regional service centers.  And those regulations are based on code sections which still refer to district directors.

        It seems as though the IRS may be operating more or less in conformance with PL 105-206 but that the codification and regulation issuing processes have failed (for twelve years) to reflect the new law.  It seems to me that it cannot be an accident, but I don't understand why the new organizations and their directors would not be made a part of the regulations.

        Does anyone have any comment about the provisions of PL 105-206 and Lindsey Springer's case involving non-existence of district directors?

        ================================


        On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Bob Conlon <bobc3591@...> wrote:
         

        Bob, good observation about the elimination of district directors but then you go on to say this: 


        No laws and regulations exist to provide for other entities to assume these functions.
      • Frog Farmer
        ... How many millions will it take? 20 years ago they admitted that there were over 40 million non-filers . Let me know when there are enough millions, and
        Message 3 of 16 , Nov 6, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          All caps BOB GREGORY wrote:

          > Instead of a small delegation entering the Emerald
          > City, there will need to be a delegation of millions of people who are
          > willing to pull back the curtain and declare an end to the con. Until
          > that happens, the fakery, fraud and rip-off operations will continue.

          How many millions will it take? 20 years ago they admitted that there
          were over 40 million "non-filers". Let me know when there are enough
          millions, and who is going to give the go signal.

          We already gave it decades ago. But then we're not involved in the
          Ponzi scheme, claiming there's no alternative.

          For concise exposition of the current ongoing fraud, I like Max Keiser
          (self made billionaire) and his friend Stacey Herbert, who have the time
          to be overly productive. He takes a personal interest in restoring the
          liberty his ancestors won from the British. I'm sure he's enlisting
          many every day better than any of us here could do.

          He has his own site (www.maxkeiser.com) and a You-tube site.

          Regards,

          FF
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.