- 8 -
section 861 argument with somber reasoning and copious citations
of precedent, as to do so might suggest that petitioner’s
arguments possess some degree of colorable merit.5 See Crain v.
Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417, 1417 (5th Cir. 1984). During the
Appeals hearing petitioner raised only his frivolous section 861
argument and did not provide any collection alternatives.
Accordingly, Appeals Officer Owens determined to proceed with
collection of petitioner’s tax liabilities for the years in
issue.
4(...continued)
(National Institute for Taxation Education) and a follower of
Thurston Paul Bell, a well-known advocate of the frivolous
section 861 argument. Petitioner also warned respondent that
respondent needed to “be informed of the present circumstances
the government is facing” in its case against Mr. Bell in the
Federal District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania to
enjoin him from promoting his sec. 861 argument and other tax
avoidance services. The remainder of those letters contain
nonsensical and almost incomprehensible “free speech” arguments
and numerous cites to caselaw and statutes taken completely out
of context.
We note that Thurston Paul Bell was enjoined from promoting
his frivolous sec. 861 argument and other tax avoidance services.
See United States v. Bell, 414 F.3d 474 (3d Cir. 2005), affg. 238
F. Supp. 2d 696 (M.D. Pa., 2003). We also note that another
well-known tax protester, Larken Rose, was recently sentenced to
15 months in prison for not filing returns and advancing the
frivolous sec. 861 argument. See United States v. Rose, 2005 WL
3216739 (E.D. Pa., May 25, 2005).
5 While we do not address petitioner’s frivolous section 861
argument, we note that respondent provided petitioner three cases
from this Court rejecting the argument: Williams v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 136, 138 (2000); Madge v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2000-370; and Aiello v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-
40.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011