John W. Schroeder, Jr. - Page 8




                                        - 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