Tax Update Blog: Permalink

« Previous · Tax Update Blog Home · Next »

REVENUE RULINGS FOR THE SLOW LEARNERS

March 15, 2005

We shall not painstakingly address petitioner's assertions “with somber reasoning and copious citation of precedent; to do so might suggest that these arguments have some colorable merit.”

The courts generally dispose of tax protestor Tax Honesty Movement arguments with this sentence, avoiding the effort of explaining the obvious to the clueless.

The IRS took up that task yesterday with a string of revenue rulings and a notice addressing some common worthless arguments against paying taxes. A summary is in the extended entry below.

This is the text of the IRS news release on these rulings, with links:

Revenue Ruling 2005-17, which emphasizes to taxpayers and to promoters and return preparers that there is no right to a refund or, or a deduction for Social Security taxes paid based on arguments that a taxpayer has waived the right to receive Social Security benefits or has donated Social Security taxes or benefits to the government.

Notice-2005-30, which sets out some of the most common frivolous arguments and schemes that taxpayer use to avoid their tax obligations.

Revenue Ruling 2005-18, which deals with taxpayers who attempt to reduce their federal tax liability by striking or altering the written declaration (the jurat) that verifies that a return, declaration, statement, or other document is made under penalties of perjury.

Revenue Ruling 2005-19, emphasizing to taxpayer and to promoters and return preparers that a taxpayer cannot avoid income tax by making frivolous constitutionally based arguments.

Revenue Ruling 2005-20, emphasizing to taxpayers and to promoters and return preparers that liability for federal taxes does not depend on whether the taxpayer agrees with the government programs or policies that are funded with the tax receipts.

Revenue Ruling 2005-21, which emphasizes to taxpayers and to promoters and return preparers that a taxpayer cannot avoid income tax on the erroneous theory that the government has created a separate and distinct entity or ‘straw man’ in place of the taxpayer and that the taxpayer is not responsible for the tax obligations of the “straw man.”

      Bookmark: del.icio.us • Digg • reddit