- 3 - On August 22, 2001, respondent issued to petitioner a notice of deficiency for 1996. Petitioner did not file a petition for judicial review with this Court.3 On July 12, 2002, respondent issued to petitioner a Final Notice--Notice of Intent to Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing (final notice). On August 6, 2002, petitioner responded to the final notice by filing a Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing. Petitioner attached a nine-page memorandum to the Form 12153, in which she sets forth frivolous and groundless arguments regarding the Federal income tax system: E.g., “it is my contention that no law authorizes the Secretary (let alone any IRS agent) to determine that I owe more in income taxes than the ‘zero’ I reported on any income tax return”; “In addition, * * * I am not disputing the ‘amount’ of the alleged tax ‘liability’, but the very ‘existence’ of an income tax ‘liability’ as a matter of law”.4 Petitioner also requested that respondent produce 3 Petitioner wrote letters to several officials of the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Treasury, claiming that the Government was engaged in an “illegal enforcement action” because income taxes were “totally voluntary, and not mandatory” and that her notice of deficiency was invalid because it was not sent directly by the Secretary of the Treasury. 4 Petitioner’s shop-worn and universally rejected frivolous arguments regarding the legitimacy of the Federal income tax system warrant no further comment. See Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417, 1417 (5th Cir. 1984) (“We perceive no need to refute these arguments with somber reasoning and copious citation (continued...)Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011