It came to my attention last month while in Tax Court in Tampa Florida, that the government today seems to have the opinion that their rules are more important that substantial justice.
I do not believe that is the way our founding fathers envisioned our government to operate.
If it had been, the Constitution would not have been so specific as to the rights of the people.
Even the Supreme Court in one of its more honest decisions, placed substantive law above the rules of court.
The United States Tax Court however, does not share the high Court's view, and in its defiance of the spirit of justice has sent a disturbing message to the Internal Revenue Service agents that they too can defy the rule of law.
IRS agents are bound by the Regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury and their Manual.
Taxes other than Subtitle A, are in fact under the direction and control of the Attorney General of the United States acting as Secretary under the code.
As the Supreme Court stated in California Banker's v Schultz, without the regulation the statute does nothing, so the examiner has no authority to enforce any statute without the guidance of the Secretary's official position on the interpretation of that statute or code section.
The Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 made it mandatory that Internal Revenue officer, employees and agents follow the Secretary's Regulations and their published Internal Revenue Manual.
Such mandatory guidance should have clipped the wings of aggressive agent behavior that the Tax Court Judges and field counsel have fostered by their arrogance and defiance of pro se litigant's rights.
Unfortunately, Congressional guidance has been ignored generally, in every court today.
Take for instance the SFR's (Substitute for Return) which the IRS examiner creates under the authority of Internal Revenue Code section 6020(b).
Not only is the Return not authorized outside of 27 C.
F.
R.
§ 53 and 70 which is Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
The return contains a zero dollar amount, which even the Tax Court in Cabirac v Commissioner admitted that; the majority of courts, including the Tax Court, have held, generally, a return that contains only zeros is not a valid return.
It is interesting, however, how federal prosecutors have charged, what they term "Illegal tax protestors" with willful failure to file, when they filed a zero return, but the Tax Court allows the IRS agents to create and file "dummy" zero returns claiming the authority of 26 U.
S.
C.
§ 6020(b) that has the effect of opening, otherwise closed accounts, for one reason, to allowing IRS agents to circumvent the Constitutional mandate of probable cause, before prying into the private affairs of citizens of the Union States where they scheme to extort money and property by making adjustments, and assess penalties and interest under "color" of law.
There is certainly a double standard in our court system today, that must be corrected, if freedom is to prevail.
The courts are our last hope for freedom.
When justice is withheld freedom is lost.
I do not believe that is the way our founding fathers envisioned our government to operate.
If it had been, the Constitution would not have been so specific as to the rights of the people.
Even the Supreme Court in one of its more honest decisions, placed substantive law above the rules of court.
The United States Tax Court however, does not share the high Court's view, and in its defiance of the spirit of justice has sent a disturbing message to the Internal Revenue Service agents that they too can defy the rule of law.
IRS agents are bound by the Regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury and their Manual.
Taxes other than Subtitle A, are in fact under the direction and control of the Attorney General of the United States acting as Secretary under the code.
As the Supreme Court stated in California Banker's v Schultz, without the regulation the statute does nothing, so the examiner has no authority to enforce any statute without the guidance of the Secretary's official position on the interpretation of that statute or code section.
The Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 made it mandatory that Internal Revenue officer, employees and agents follow the Secretary's Regulations and their published Internal Revenue Manual.
Such mandatory guidance should have clipped the wings of aggressive agent behavior that the Tax Court Judges and field counsel have fostered by their arrogance and defiance of pro se litigant's rights.
Unfortunately, Congressional guidance has been ignored generally, in every court today.
Take for instance the SFR's (Substitute for Return) which the IRS examiner creates under the authority of Internal Revenue Code section 6020(b).
Not only is the Return not authorized outside of 27 C.
F.
R.
§ 53 and 70 which is Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
The return contains a zero dollar amount, which even the Tax Court in Cabirac v Commissioner admitted that; the majority of courts, including the Tax Court, have held, generally, a return that contains only zeros is not a valid return.
It is interesting, however, how federal prosecutors have charged, what they term "Illegal tax protestors" with willful failure to file, when they filed a zero return, but the Tax Court allows the IRS agents to create and file "dummy" zero returns claiming the authority of 26 U.
S.
C.
§ 6020(b) that has the effect of opening, otherwise closed accounts, for one reason, to allowing IRS agents to circumvent the Constitutional mandate of probable cause, before prying into the private affairs of citizens of the Union States where they scheme to extort money and property by making adjustments, and assess penalties and interest under "color" of law.
There is certainly a double standard in our court system today, that must be corrected, if freedom is to prevail.
The courts are our last hope for freedom.
When justice is withheld freedom is lost.
Source...