- 8 -
Petitioner filed an Opposition to respondent’s motion. In
his Opposition, petitioner repeats many of the allegations made
in the petition. Thus, for example, the Opposition includes the
following allegations:
Petitioner disagrees with respondent’s decision because
I am not required to file a 1040 return and claim my
wages as gross taxable income as claimed by the
respondent. I have never had a filing requirement
therefore respondent has no authority to collect any
tax or require petitioner to file, or waste a bunch of
time communicating with them over nonsense. This is an
infringement on the petitioner’s freedom. * * *
Petitioner and the courts can assume the respondent had
no authority for sending the notices of proposed
assessment or the final notices, and demand for payment
to the petitioner. The respondent has no authority to
collect a tax from the petitioner because the
petitioner has No Filing Requirement! And the only
sections that authorize an income tax and the
respondent to send these notices are sections which
apply to non-resident aliens, foreign corporations and
their withholding agents who are required to file a
1040 under 26 USC sections 7701, 1441, 1442, 1443 and
1461!
In his Opposition, petitioner also alleges that he was not
offered an administrative hearing.
Pursuant to notice, respondent’s motion was called for
hearing at the Court's motions session in Washington, D.C.
Counsel for respondent appeared at the hearing and presented
argument in support of the pending motion. In contrast, there
was no appearance by or on behalf of petitioner, nor did
petitioner file a statement pursuant to Rule 50(c), the
provisions of which were mentioned by the Court in its Order
calendaring respondent’s motion for hearing.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011