Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alice!ark
From: ark@alice.UucP (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: net.taxes
Subject: Re: I AM NOT A CROOK
Message-ID: <5169@alice.uUCp>
Date: Mon, 24-Mar-86 18:07:21 EST
Article-I.D.: alice.5169
Posted: Mon Mar 24 18:07:21 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Mar-86 05:26:22 EST
References: <2046@uwmacc.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Murray Hill
Lines: 15

> I fully agree with Mr Gross here.  There's a world of difference
> between claiming something you know is false (mortgage points,
> for example, when you didn't pay any) and claiming something
> about which you have a legitimate uncertainty (points on refinancing,
> for example).  The average taxpayer is not a tax lawyer, and cannot
> be expected to consult one on every ambiguous point because the
> average tax payer may not even be able to *recognise* an ambiguous
> point.

It's even worse than that.  It's not even possible to ask the IRS
about whether a deduction is valid or not.  Well, actually it *is*
possible but won't do much good because the answers you get are not
binding.  Thus it is entirely possible to ask "Can I deduct this?"
be told "yes," and then have them turn around and disallow it
after you've filed.