Results 1 to 10 of 54

Thread: Generic Notice and Demand - $350 civil suit

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    Hi Bentley;


    That is a fascinating post. I cannot help but wonder though if the basis of fraud is incorrect considering the remedy espoused on this website?
    Hi David,

    The fraud exists because the T.O. was cancelled in 2005 by Secretary O'Neill. The designation for the 'entity', as the treasury order itself refers to the organization formerly known as BIR/IRS was lawfully cancelled. Usage of the designation since then, it can be argued, violates 31 USC 333. We should start referring to them as the 'entity.'

    Moreover, Public Law 105-206, known as RRA98,at section 3445 is violated by the 'entity' as that section requires the district director or assistant district director to authorize, by personal approval, certain levies. This requirement is codified at 6334 of U.S.C. 26 but totally ignored by the entity because they claim the position has been cancelled. Internal Revenue districts are another matter illustrative of violation. i'll post a document in the future relating to this.

    I like your notice and demand and will confront the National Taxpayer Advocate with it. What do you think?

    Bentley

  2. #2
    Oh, I forgot to mention, every 1040 form printed and used since April 2006 is fraudulent before the first drop of ink is applied to it and in violation of 31 USC 333 because of T.O. 150-06.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •