Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lsuc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!dave
From: dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman)
Newsgroups: net.consumers,net.legal,net.taxes
Subject: IRS (was: bad signatures on checks)
Message-ID: <1294@lsuc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 16-Jul-86 05:25:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: lsuc.1294
Posted: Wed Jul 16 05:25:43 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 16-Jul-86 06:16:46 EDT
References: <1344@felix.UUCP> <5774@alice.uUCp> <1287@lsuc.UUCP> <918@kontron.UUCP>
Reply-To: dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman)
Organization: Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto
Lines: 46
Xref: lsuc net.consumers:4011 net.legal:2789 net.taxes:598

In article <918@kontron.UUCP> cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>> >The IRS has also been known to fine people $500 (for a frivolous return)
>> >for doing things like writing checks to "internal ripoff service."
>> >Watch your step.
>> 
>> I would be interested in further details on this, since I find
>> it difficult to justify from a legal point of view.  In Canada,
>
>Most everything IRS does is difficult to justify from a legal point of
>view.

I've heard this view expressed before, in net.taxes (which group
I've now added to this discussion).  I admit I don't know that much
about the U.S. tax system, but I still find it hard to believe.
Americans are the most litigious people on earth, and you have
a solid constitutional framework which can be, and is, used to
attack laws and procedures which are unjust.  Now maybe the IRS
really is so powerful that no-one can risk attacking it, but I
still have my doubts.

>> the filing of the return is independent of the payment, although
>> of course they're usually done together.  But a return filed with
>> no cheque is just as valid as one with a cheque, and although
>> interest will run on unpaid balances, penalties for not filing
>> don't apply once the return is filed.  How could writing an
>> invalid cheque have any effect on this process?
>> 
>> I could understand a charge of attempted fraud, perhaps.
>> But filing a frivolous return?
>> 
>> Dave Sherman
>
>About three years ago, IRS had Congress pass a law making it illegal 
>to file a "frivolous" return.  I'm not sure exactly how Congress defined
>"frivolous", but the way IRS has enforced this law is to discourage any
>political comments that question their validity.

Again, what does the payment have to do with the return?
Where is this legislation - part of the Internal Revenue Code?
Section number?

Dave Sherman
The Law Society of Upper Canada
Toronto
-- 
{ ihnp4!utzoo  seismo!mnetor  utzoo  hcr  decvax!utcsri  } !lsuc!dave