- 9 -
2002 * * *. This hearing was not audio or stenographi-
cally recorded. The taxpayer was advised prior to the
hearing by letter that no audio recording or steno-
graphic recording would be allowed per a directive
issued by the Acting Chief of Appeals dated 05/02/02.
* * * * * * *
Issues Raised by the Taxpayer
* * * * * * *
At the hearing Appeals attempted to review with the
taxpayer the certified transcripts, Forms 4340, the
return packages, the statutory notices of deficiency,
and the basis of assessments based on the wages re-
ported. The taxpayer only raised non-filer arguments
and stated that he had only attached the Forms W-2 to
claim a refund of the withholding. The taxpayer stated
that he did not believe that wages are income. The
taxpayer was advised that he had received the statutory
notices of deficiency for the 1997 and 1998 years for
the assessment of the individual income tax liabilities
and was precluded from raising this issue at the col-
lection due process hearing. * * *
When the taxpayer was asked if he wished to discuss
collection alternatives, he stated that he was inter-
ested in knowing if Appeals could point out the site
[sic] where the Internal Revenue Code stated that he
was liable for taxes. Due to the fact that the tax-
payer only continued to raise non-filer arguments and
in addition was not in filing compliance, collection
alternatives were not discussed. The taxpayer does not
believe that wages are income and does not believe that
the tax laws apply to him. The hearing was concluded.
Appeals did provide to the taxpayer recent court case
decisions on T. Pierson and R. Davis wherein the same
type of arguments were raised and the taxpayer was
advised that in some instances sanctions were being
imposed for raising these arguments.
The taxpayer raised no other non-frivolous issues.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011