- 15 -
and that “he is authorized to send such
notice.” * * * Therefore, after
receiving those Deficiency Notices from
Gwen Krauss * * * we wrote her * * *
asking her to supply us with her
delegation of authority from the
Secretary to send out such Notices
(pursuant to Code Sections 7701(11)(B) &
7701(12)(A)(i)), and she never answered
our letter. We have since received
proof that Gwen Krauss has no such
delegation of authority. Therefore, the
Deficiency Notices we received from her
were invalid - and we are barred from
petitioning Tax Court from invalid
Deficiency Notices. Beside, we are not
challenging the “amount” of the alleged
“deficiency”: we are challenging its
“existence,” as a matter of law.
However, since Tax Court is not a court
of law (See Freytag v. C.I.R., 11 S. Ct.
2631 * * * the Tax Court would have no
jurisdiction to consider the legal
question of whether or not the Internal
Revenue Code establishes an income tax
“liability” as a matter of law.
* * * * * * *
7) We claim there is no statute requiring
us “to pay” the income taxes at issue.
Another relevant issue is “Whether or not there is
a statute requiring us ‘to pay’ the income taxes at
issue?” Code Section 6321 provides that only when one
fails “to pay any tax” can there be “a lien in favor of
the United States.” Therefore, before there can be a
“lien in favor of the United States” there must be a
statutory requirement “to pay” the income taxes at
issue. The Index of the Code we will bring to our CDP
hearing contains a Section entitled “Payment of tax.”
(Attached as Exhibit H) It contains over 60 entries.
* * * however, there is no entry we can find for
“income taxes.” It is therefore our belief that there
is no law requiring us “to pay” income taxes, and this
certainly is a “relevant issue” that is appropriately
raised at a CDP hearing - since, if the appeals officer
can not identify any statute that requires us “to pay”
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011