- 48 -
laws.” Courts have repeatedly rejected as frivolous the
argument, advanced by petitioner in the case at hand, that the
Internal Revenue Service is not a governmental agency. In Young
v. IRS, 596 F. Supp. 141, 147 (N.D. Ind. 1984), the court stated:
it is clear that the Secretary of the Treasury has full
authority to administer and enforce the Internal
Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. �7801, and has the power to
create an agency to administer and enforce the laws.
See 26 U.S.C. �7803(a). Pursuant to this legislative
grant of authority, the Secretary of the Treasury
created the IRS. 26 C.F.R. �601.101. The end result
is that the IRS is a creature of “positive law” because
it was created through congressionally mandated power.
By plaintiff's own “positive law” premise, then, the
IRS is a validly created governmental agency and not a
“private corporation.” * * *
In Salman v. Dept. of Treasury, 899 F. Supp. 471, 472 (D. Nev.
1995), the court stated: “The court finds there is no basis in
fact for Salman's contention that the IRS is not a government
agency of the United States. * * * In short, Salman's action is
wholly frivolous, and this court must dismiss it with prejudice.”
In Kay v. Summers, 86 AFTR 2d 7161, 7165, 2001-1 USTC par.
50,103, at 87,013 (D. Nev. 2000), the court held the plaintiff’s
contention “that the Internal Revenue Service is some sort of
private corporation, not a government agency” to be frivolous.
See also United States v. Fern, 696 F.2d 1269, 1273 (11th Cir.
1983) (“Clearly, the Internal Revenue Service is a ‘department or
agency’ of the United States.”); Thomson v. United States, 88
AFTR 2d 5620, 5621, 2001-2 USTC par. 50,614, at 89,521 (S.D. Fla.
Page: Previous 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011