Company beats IRS penalties with Lawful Money

[JohnnyCash]

This company actually received IRS late notices for 3 quarters of 2011, 2nd QTR, 3rd QTR, and 4th QTR. The company filed three separate Form 843 Abatement requests (with similar 4-point argument and lawful money demand attached) and then received three separate notices of forgiveness. Total victory of over $8k.

Nice try though, Greg. Play again?

[martin earl]

This company actually received IRS late notices for 3 quarters of 2011, 2nd QTR, 3rd QTR, and 4th QTR. The company filed three separate Form 843 Abatement requests (with similar 4-point argument and lawful money demand attached) and then received three separate notices of forgiveness. Total victory of over $8k.

Nice try though, Greg. Play again?

Johnny'onthemoney'Cash!!

[JohnnyCash]

heh. Just like to address some misconceptions I've seen about this victory. Some have indicated the Company paid in full eventually so this was just a standard penalty abatement, no big deal. No. Company paid late. Every agreement/contract calling for timely payments includes PENALTIES for late payments. This is standard contract law - without late penalties there's no incentive to pay on time. Here the company paid late, admits to paying late, and by all outward appearance SHOULD HAVE BEEN PENALIZED by statute. Something scared the banking cartel/IRS off. Did I tell you the company paid LATE? 56 days late.

The "Statement of Adjustment to Your Account" from the IRS states that it is the result of "your inquiry of July 19, 2012."

But the "suitor" doesn't supply a copy of that, either.

So we don't know what the suitor said, and we don't know why the IRS did what it did, and from that we are supposed to believe that the abatement was due to some gibberish about "lawful money"?

Thanks to Quixote, the Q has discovered this success. The quote above is from LPC (Denial B. Evans). My answer: I did supply a copy of that. The "inquiry of July 19, 2012" was the Form 843 with attachments (4 arguments with Lawful Money deposit ticket). That's it. The date on the Form 843 must've been redacted but that was all company sent. Then "Mary Hannah" responding for the IRS calls it "correspondence" (huh? since when is a 843 filing correspondence?) but it was just that 843 with attachments that was sent. Finally then, on Sept 10th company received a 2-page reply (page1 shown & page2 was just a mostly blank page with a cut-out $0 due coupon on bottom). That's it. Does LPC actually think the IRS is gonna admit the SCAM? Oh yeah, we granted your abatement because lawful money is outside the Fed Reserve system. Not gonna happen, as that would reveal the scam!

Here's how I imagine it went down in the Odgen Service Center:
Counsel1: This one's attached evidence of lawful money.
Counsel2: Shat.
Counsel1: What?"
Counsel2: It's the past tense of...
Counsel1: No! this looks like the real deal, like that STSC group in Colorado.
Counsel2: What are our options?
Counsel1: We could bluff 'em.
Counsel2: But if they persist it's litigation and we'd lose.
Counsel1: Yep, and our loss would be plastered all over the internet.
Counsel2: I think we have to let this one go.
Counsel1: Yeah. Full abatement.

[JohnnyCash]

Update; seems this company still has trouble following the statutes with regard to payroll taxes:

http://s12.postimage.org/wx0jgbonh/CP276_B.jpg