Skip to comments.Court: Taxpayers can ignore IRS summonses
Posted on 02/01/2005 6:16:28 AM PST by TIElniff
Court: Taxpayers can ignore IRS summonses Ruling says action has no teeth without federal court order
A U.S. appeals court has ruled the IRS cannot compel taxpayers to turn over personal and private property without a federal court order and that taxpayers can ignore the agencies summonses until actual enforcement action is taken.
In the case Schulz v. IRS, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan ruled:
... absent an effort to seek enforcement through a federal court, IRS summonses apply no force to taxpayers, and no consequence whatever can befall a taxpayer who refuses, ignores, or otherwise does not comply with an IRS summons until that summons is backed by a federal court order. ? [A taxpayer] cannot be held in contempt, arrested, detained, or otherwise punished for refusing to comply with the original IRS summons, no matter the taxpayer's reasons, or lack of reasons for so refusing.
Bob Schulz, the plaintiff, is head of We the People, an organization that has taken separate legal action against the federal government for its failure to answer a "petition for redress of grievances" regarding the income tax. Though the court affirmed a lower court decision in favor of the IRS, saying Schulz's motion to quash an IRS summons lacked "subject matter," it used the ruling as a means to clarify the agency's power under 26 U.S.C. Section 7604.
The appeals court decision [.pdf document ] of Jan. 25 stated the federal courts protect taxpayers from an "overreaching" IRS and that the agency must go through the federal courts before force can be applied on anyone to turn over personal and private property to the IRS. Absent a federal court order, the IRS summons amounts simply to a "request," the court ruled, which can be ignored.
A statement on the group's website went on to say: "Without declaring provisions of the code unconstitutional on their face, the court, in effect, nullified key enforcement provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, stripping the IRS of much of its power to compel compliance with its administrative demands for personal and private property."
We the People claims the court decision will benefit the organization's class-action lawsuit against the IRS.
States the group: "The court has expressly recognized that the IRS, as has been asserted in the right-to-petition lawsuit, routinely violates people's due process rights in their day-to-day administrative practices. As such, the findings of the Second Circuit firmly establish for the District Court the substance of the causes of action put forth in our right-to-petition lawsuit."
Schulz's lawsuit stemmed from an IRS summons served on him in relation to an investigation. He claims the summons was a direct infringement on his First Amendment rights.
Activists of the "tax honesty" movement, in which WTP is a leading voice, believe the federal government lacks any legal jurisdiction to enforce the income tax, that there is no law that requires Americans to pay the tax, and that the tax is enforced in a manner that violates the U.S. Constitution.
how strong is the leg that earned income is "personal and private property"?
Could this have helped Al Capone in any way ????
Could this have helped Al Capone in any way ????
Or how about the NAACP?
Does this ruling only apply to certain areas, like the homemade machinegun situation in the ninth circuit?
Thanks for the correction.
How can the fruits of your labor NOT be 'private property'?
well, thats what I was getting at - I can picture someone making the argument that unless it is court ordered, they dont have to pay
Does anyone doubt that judgments will now be accompanied by federal court orders?
Federal judges can issue federal court orders.
irs bump for later read
actually the process will probably be turned over to Federal Magistrates for the inevitable notice and hearings.
Somehow I imagine cases that get that far are not too common.
But, Bob Schulz will get rich off tapes and cassettes and books, bought by gullible people who think that they, somehow, don't owe any taxes.
I guess the NAACP has nothing to worry about now.
The Court ruled that, because IRS summonses are universally recognized as having no legal significance, Mr. Schulz presented no justiciable issue to the Court for consideration when he asked that a summons be quashed.
This appears to be the result argued by the IRS and is actually something of an erosion of taxpayer rights in the 2nd Circuit which had, in a case 40 years or so ago, permitted taxpayers to challenge IRS summonses.
Which will require the hiring of more judges......and more taxes to support them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.