Joe Patriot
123 Anywhere Street
Mytown, Maryland 12345
IRS Reference No.: 999-99-9999 (SS-5 application revoked on 10/21/92)
February 28, 1998Certified Mail No. 1234 5678 9012 3456 7890
Re: Your letter, dated February 20, 1998.
J. Harrington, Group Manager
Internal Revenue Service Center
1040 Iowa Avenue
Riverside, CA 92507
Dear Ms. Harrington,
I am in receipt of your letter, dated February 20, 1998, which purports to be a reply to my February 5, 1998 letter. This non-rebuttal response letter makes allegations in a general sense, failing to specifically identify any liability or requirement that I might have individually. The following observations were made concerning your designate's letter:
You state, "We do not respond to letters of this kind on a point by point basis However we are pleased to have the opportunity to explain to you the mission of the Internal Revenue Service."
(I) According to the Internal Revenue Manual, at P-6-12, entitiled "Timeliness and Quality of Taxpayer Correspondence":
The Service will issue quality responses to all taxpayer correspondence.
Taxpayer correspondence is defined as all written communication from a taxpayer or his/her representative, excluding tax returns, whether solicited or unsolicited. This includes taxpayer requests for information, as well as that which may accompany a tax return; responses to IRS requests for information; and annotated notice responses.
A quality response is timely, accurate, professional in tone, responsive to taxpayer needs (i.e., resolves all issues without further contact). [emphasis added]
Ms. Harrington, please explain why the "practice" of the Internal Revenue Service does not conform to the published "policy" of the IRS, as shown above. Your letter is certainly not a "quality response" as that term is defined in P-6-12 above, as it does not address any of the issues presented in my February 5, 1998 letter. Further, my letter did not request an explanation of the "mission of the Internal Revenue Service", so I fail to see what relevance such an explanation as is contained in your letter has with respect to such issues. Therefore, please respond to the issues presented in my February 5, 1998 letter on a point by point basis in accordance with P-6-12.
You also state, "We support and have successfully implemented the Taxpayer Bill of Rights passed by Congress on November 20, 1988."
(II) Ms. Harrington, while it is encouraging to be told that you have implemented a law that is now ten years old, it would be infinitely more helpful if you would address the issues from my letter of February 5, 1998. Further, Congress has already enacted a second Taxpayer Bill of Rights. When will the IRS be implementing it?
You go on to state, "Please remember that refusal to file and/or pay taxes when such valid returns are required is illegal."
(III)There is no question that refusal to file and/or pay taxes would be illegal when such actions are required, and my previous letter makes clear that those actions are not required in my case. In regards to illegal actions, you should remember that demanding other or greater amounts than are authorized under law is also illegal, as is depriving someone of their Constitutional rights.
You continue, "The courts have consistently backed the legality of taxes, with most arguments put forth by being [sic] classified as frivolous."
(IV)Your designate's statement doesn't reference any statements made within my letter, and so I can not determine if you are attempting to rebut some particular fact or law presented therein. Therefore, if you are contending that the courts have ruled on any of the issues presented within my letter, or held that any of them are frivolous, it will be necessary for you to specify the facts, laws, or statements to which you are referring and to cite the court cases you contend ruled on the issues involved. Otherwise, these general statements in no way rebut anything within my letter of February 5, 1998.
You further state, "We hope that you reexamine your philosophy of protesting the tax laws and decide to rejoin the taxpaying public who believe that the only fair and equitable tax system is one where everyone is complying with the tax laws."
(V) It is obvious from your designate's statement above that you did not read my letter, as otherwise you would know that nowhere within that Affidavit did I protest the tax laws, but rather pointed out the limited application of those tax laws. It is my hope that you reconsider your policy of refusing to address the valid issues raised in my February 5, 1998 letter, by not rebutting any of the statements of law and fact contained within it, and start complying with the tax laws as they are written.
In your unresponsive letter, you did not answer any of the statements in my February 5, 1998 letter, either generally or specifically (because of your non-rebuttal, now presumed to be factually correct). Nevertheless, I am giving you an additional thirty (30) days to respond with any actual documented rebuttal you might have. If such a response is not forthcoming, it will be presumed that you have no basis upon which to make one, and that all of your previous correspondence was sent in error.
______
Joe Patriot
Enclosures:Copy of your letter dated February 20, 1998; copy of my letter, dated February 5, 1998.
cc: Retained for file.
Page 1 of 3