Vexatious Litigation Penalties Upheld Against The Courtroom Commando
Mac has not drunk the tax protester Kool-Aid that will convince you that the income tax is limited to treasury messengers who live in the District of Columbia or some other inane notion. He has, however, adopted a technique that the sophisticated among the not conventionally tax compliant will use – holding the feet of the IRS to the fire of meticulous procedural scrutiny. That was the approach that got him sanctioned. After receiving the transcripts from the hearing officer, he requested “a summary record of assessment” (Form 23C), Form 4340, a copy of the actual document signed by the officer and the delegation order showing authorization to assess.
Former IRS Investigator Joe Banister Loses Appeal Of Aiding And Abetting Penalties
Back in 2003, the IRS Office of Professional Responsibility revoked Banister’s right to represent clients before the IRS. He had that right as a CPA. A follow on to the OPR ruling would be revocation of his CPA license, but that is neither here nor there. The revocation was appealed to the Ninth Circuit where it was sustained. Among the things involved in the revocation was his raising the 861 argument. He should have known better so he can no longer represent taxpayers. Since the issue of him making a bad argument has been litigated once with respect to the revocation, he does not get to fight it again with respect to the penalty. That was the District Court ruling.
Follow Me
Over and over again courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging one’s affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich or poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands: taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions. To demand more in the name of morals is mere cant.