|
Our license agreement clearly states that use
of our software for illegal activities is strictly forbidden and you
may be subject to civil and/or criminal penalties. We reserve the
right to terminate a license agreement and will do so if we have any
reason to believe that the end-user is using the software for illegal
activities.
This information is being provided to the
taxpayer and follows the
guidelines for best practices for tax advisors per Circular 230
§10.33(a)(1-4), and §10.35(b)(2), (8), and (10). This written statement may
be considered to be a “covered opinion” as defined by the Internal Revenue
Service. This statement(s), along with subsequent correspondence, is not
intended or written to be used, and cannot be used by the taxpayer, for the
purpose of avoiding lawful penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer by
the Internal Revenue Service. The principal purpose of any stated tax advice
included here has as its purpose to claim tax benefits in a manner
consistent with the statutes and Congressional intent.
Specific case laws establishing tax law
precedence is provided below:
United States v. Furman, 168 F.Supp.2d 609 (E.D. La.
2001)
Rejecting criminal defendant’s contention that he
was not properly identified in federal government documents that
misspelled his name or used his properly spelled name in all capital
letters).
United States v. Lindsay, 184 F.3d 1138, 1144 (10th
Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 981 (1999)
Affirming a district court decision not to reduce a
tax protester’s prison sentence because, among other things, the tax
protester claimed not to be the person named in the court documents.
Wilcox v. Commissioner, 848 F.2d 1007, 1008 (9th Cir.
1988)
Calling “baseless” defendant’s contention that the
indictment must be dismissed because his name, spelled in capital
letters, “is a fictitious name used by the government to tax him
improperly as a business”.
Lovell v. United States, 755 F.2d 517, 519 (7th Cir.
1984)
“[A]ll individuals, natural or unnatural, must pay
federal income tax on their wages . . ..”
United States v. Romero, 640 F.2d 1014, 1017 (9th Cir.
1981)
“[I]n our system of government, one is free to speak
out in open opposition to the provisions of the tax laws, but such
opposition does not relieve a citizen of his obligation to pay
taxes.”
|
Contact Us |
About Us
| 
Blog
View Cart!
|
Learning Center
| 
Support
