- 4 -
or individuals named herein are natural born Citizens
of one of the 50 Republic states, under the
Constitution and Law.
A hearing pursuant to petitioners’ request was conducted on
February 12, 2002, with a court reporter present. A transcript
of the proceedings was made. A Certificate of Assessments and
Payments for 1997 had been mailed to petitioners before the
hearing. At the hearing attended by petitioner James Benson
Dunham (Mr. Dunham), Mr. Jewett repeated his frivolous arguments.
Among other things, Mr. Jewett argued:
MR. JEWETT: * * * Most importantly, and of course,
we’ll get around to this, but I think that it’s
important to make sure that it’s clear from the
beginning that one of the arguments that my clients are
making is that they’re not liable for the so-called
income tax. And I would point out that if one opens
the index to the code, a copy of which I have in front
of me, one will find a listing of many different types
of taxes for which there is liability in the Internal
Revenue Code. Nowhere, therein, is there a liability
listed for an income tax.
HEARING OFFICER GEORGE: Those arguments that your
clients raise in their appeal request and on their form
1040s have been refuted by the judicial authorities and
have been called frivolous. And I’m going to hand to
you and your client News Release Number IR-2001-59.
That gives you an idea and lists the cases that have
made similar arguments such as those that you’re making
today and those that you have made. The Tax Court has
determined that those types of arguments are frivolous
and it could cost your client more money if you
advocate in court the same arguments that you’re
advocating today because the taxpayers and their
representatives who make those kinds of arguments are
being sanctioned.
MR. JEWETT: Well, let me just say this, in
response to that, Ms. George. I think you’ll agree
with me that James and Melanie Dunham’s name is not
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011