Deborah A. Messina - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         
               have.  The Comptroller’s Office does not make an in-                   
               quiry or judge the number of exemptions but does as a                  
               matter of policy, forward on a quarterly basis, copies                 
               of all W-4s that reflect over 10 exemptions to the                     
               I.R.S.  Ms. Coffin further stated that the employee is                 
               then subject to an inquiry from the I.R.S. that re-                    
               quests that the employee state the basis for claiming                  
               these exemptions on their W-4.                                         
                    Based upon the above information you have stated                  
               that your client intends to claim a higher number of                   
               exemptions than she in fact has in order to substan-                   
               tially reduce the projected withholding of $60,136.  In                
               your estimation, the number of exemptions will be well                 
               above the 2 exemptions that she claimed prior to her                   
               termination.  It is your opinion, based upon advice                    
               from a tax expert, that the number will be legally                     
               defensible because it reflects a good faith projection                 
               of Mrs. Messina’s tax liability.  Further, you have                    
               stated that Mrs. Messina fully understands that her                    
               claim may subject her to an inquiry by the I.R.S. and                  
               that there may be negative tax consequences and/or                     
               penalties because of her decision to claim higher                      
               exemptions.  [Reproduced literally.]                                   
               After having received the Maryland Attorney General’s April            
          26, 1994 letter, Mr. Ober sent to petitioner by facsimile a                 
          memorandum dated April 28, 1994.  That memorandum stated in                 
          pertinent part:                                                             
                    Per our telephone conversation of yesterday eve-                  
               ning, enclosed please find a copy of the latest fax                    
               transmittal from DHR’s [Department of Human Resources                  
               of the State of Maryland] attorney which includes a 2-                 
               page letter [Maryland Attorney General’s August 26,                    
               1994 letter to Mr. Ober] and a 5-page Release and                      
               Settlement Agreement [agreement].  If the agreement is                 
               acceptable to you as is, please sign on the appropriate                
               line thereof (the bottom left of page 4 of the agree-                  
               ment) and fax the page containing your signature back                  
               to me.                                                                 
                    The arrangement that I have with DHR is that you                  
               are to report to work on the Eastern Shore tomorrow,                   
               contingent upon receipt by DHR today of your faxed                     





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011