Most Recent Posts
FAIR Tax Abolishes IRS – Then What?
Most of the cases that I read would still be matters of controversy under the Fair Tax. Who’s kid is this? Is that really a business expense? You flat out did not pay, so we are taking your stuff. With fifty plus different revenue departments doing the enforcement, how likely is it to be consistent across the country?
Fifty plus revenue departments implementing a federal tax is a recipe for massive inconsistencies. Eventually, after horror stories about the aggressive New York and California auditors and the way too easygoing ones in Alaska, it will occur to somebody, that collecting federal taxes consistently across the country probably requires federal employees. Somebody feeling nostalgic might propose calling the resulting agency the IRS, but that probably will not happen.
Homeowner Association IRS Ruling Highlights Schizophrenic Nature Of Associations
Private Letter Rulings are redacted, so I get to make up a name for the HA. I’m going to call it Gategate, because it seems to be somewhat attached to gates. My inference from the ruling is that the HA is more of a vacation spot than a place where people live permanently since it talks about having both campsites and mobile home sites. There are different deals on how the electric bills are handled.
State Fails To Force Electronic Payments On Taxpayer With Hacking Concerns
Applying that “objective standard” to the facts of the present appeal, the Board found and ruled that the appellant demonstrated reasonable cause for failing to comply with the Commissioner’s electronic payment mandate. The Board found credible the appellant’s testimony that it was his consistent practice to avoid electronic payment of all bills, not just his tax obligations, and to keep his bank account information separate from his e-mail and other electronic media. The Board further found that his concerns regarding the electronic transmission of his personal financial data to be reasonable in these circumstances, given his reference to the hacking of the Pentagon’s computer systems and in light of the many well-publicized instances of large-scale thefts of financial information following computer security breaches at businesses and other institutions.
Has Mind Control Conspiracy Captured IRS?
Ernie founded Defender because he like many other people was a victim of M attacks. Defender operates in State G, but chose to incorporate in State D, “due to their advantageous tax strategies for business owners and entrepreneurs and also corporate veil protection for business”. (I think D might be Delaware, but would not rule out Nevada). Ernie had exhausted his personal investments paying expenses for equipment, supplies, consulting services, and start-up costs. He contacted a company F (Let’s call them Funhouse) which provided a consultant for marketing, an asset protection planner, and a nonprofit specialist. The Funhouse team took care of registration and the application for exempt status (Form 1023). The Funhouse team also agreed to “find grant funds and compile a list of possible donors” that would be sympathetic to the cause. The Funhouse group would also help Defender get a line of credit.
Don’t Leave Money To Children Buried Under IRS Liens
There is a pretty strong impulse among parents to treat their children equally when it comes to inheritance. There are times when this impulse should be overridden. If one of your children is burdened by tax liens that are well beyond their prospective inheritance leaving money to that child is equivalent to leaving money to the IRS. Worse you are likely involving the other children in the tax problems since the executor of the estate will probably not just roll over and turn the money over to the IRS. The litigation costs will eat into the estate.
Veteran Activist Mourns His Mentor
I'd like to say that Tom Cahill needs no introduction. Maybe he doesn't to you. That fellow shaking hands with Tom Cahill was President of the United States at the...
Obamacare Upheld Against Another Challenge – Court Rules Against Sissel
So it was not a mandate, really. It is a tax, which gave Mr. Sissel another opening. Bills to raise revenue are supposed to start in the House of Representatives (Origination Clause). Mr. Sissel’s reading of the legislative history indicated that there was a tax bill that started in the House, that had nothing to do with health care. The Senate gutted that bill and put in the Affordable Care Act. So really, the bill started in the Senate.
Apparently, we won’t have to sort through that legislative mishegas, because the Court ruled that even though the mandate is a tax, it is not designed to raise revenue, even though it may raise quite a bit of revenue.
Retailer Can Only Deduct Perks When Redeemed
Accordingly, whether a customer paid something for the purchase of gas or nothing, petitioner’s obligation to redeem fuelperks! was subject to a condition precedent that could be satisfied only after the close of petitioner’s tax year. We find that petitioner’s liability for outstanding fuelperks! became fixed upon their redemption, not when the customer earned the fuelperks! as petitioner contends. We thus hold that the claimed deductions for the outstanding fuelperks liabilities do not satisfy section 461(h)(4) and section 1.461-1(a)(2), Income Tax Regs.
Kent Hovind’s Battle With The IRS In Retrospect
In my post yesterday, I noted that Kent Hovind, Doctor Dino, is facing a new criminal charge related to filing a motion in defiance of an injunction. I have been following this story for some time and thought that this might be a good point to do a round-up of the coverage I have provided so far. You may note a little bit of repetition as in most of the posts I try to give a brief discussion of the possibly oxymoronic concept of “creation science”. Maybe you can decide whether my understanding has been, if you will excuse the expression, evolving.
Time To Let Kent Hovind Go Home?
This “renewed” contempt order, made at the end of the petitioner’s 10 year sentence after the government has liquidated the properties which form the basis for the 2012 injunction, creates a rebuttable presumption that this July 8, 2014 motions is retaliation against the petitioner for him exercising his constitutional right to redress and appeal in furtherance of exposing the government’s aforementioned misconduct.