Winning report from SC Department Of Revenue

PB before

Before entering the KGB headquarters, Dr. Clarkson swears in "Patriot M" as witness—"Patriot B" in middle!

PB During1

The patriot has the best possible cheering squad in the torture chamber with him—Clarkson and two of his cronies.

PB lunch

At lunch after the showdown, Patriot B is clearly confident that the Clarkson method is going to see him through.


Agents react to a camera like a vampire to a cross. WHY?

Inside the Torture Chamber

Article by e-PC Editor

State DOR

Robert Clarkson only suggests options and explains possible consequences. You must make your own decisions. The PN does not control or manage any case. As a pro se litigant, you must do that yourself.

Table of Contents

  1. North Carolina
    1. Assessment Procedure-State Law 105-241.1
    2. Mary Patriot's Response to DOR
    3. Protest of Proposed Assessment
    4. Charles Patriot
      1. Administrative Letter
    5. Ray Patriot
      1. Ray Patriot's Letter to DOR
      2. Ray's Notice of Intent to Appeal of Final Decision
      3. Ray's Petition for Review
      4. Ray's letter to tax review board (Dec 12, 2007)
      5. Ray's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
  2. South Carolina
    1. Patriots knock out SCDOR
      1. Mike Freeman's case
        1. Motion for Rehearing
        2. Mike Freeman's Petitioner's Preliminary Tax Statement
        3. Mike Freeman's Denial of Assessment
        4. Mike Freeman's Complaint Letter to Taxpayers Advocate
        5. Mike Freeman's TP Advocate on DOR liens
        6. Mike Freeman's Protest of Tax Lien
        7. Mike Freeman's Response Proposed Assessment 2000
        8. Mike Freeman's Proper Letter to Authorities
        9. Mike Freeman's Response to Attorney Threat
        10. Mike Freeman's Complaint to ALJ on DOR Counsel
        11. Mike Freeman's Response to Failure to Deny
        12. Mike Freeman's Representation Letter
        13. Mike Freeman's Complaint Letter to DOR Counsel Supervisor
        14. Mike Freeman's Response to Tax Lien Notice
        15. Letter to Remove Illegal Liens
        16. Move for Dismissal
        17. Mike Freeman's DOR Withholding 1999
        18. Mike Freeman's Notice of Hearing
        19. Mike Freeman's Notice of Lien
        20. Mike Freeman's Assessment Satisfaction 1999
        21. Mike Freeman's Response to Collection Fee Notice and Lien
        22. Mike Freeman's Protest of Tax Lien
        23. Mike Freeman's Attached sheet to Request for Contested Case Hearing
      2. Ralph Patriot's Case
        1. Ralph Patriot's Response to DOR Threat
        2. Ralph Patriot's Complaint Letter to Chief DOR Thug
      3. Cindy Patriot's Case
        1. Cynthia Patriot's Follow Up Letter
        2. Cindy's Prehearing Statement
        3. Request for Rehearing
      4. Gary Patriot's Case
        1. Gary's Response to Assessment
        2. Gary Patriot's "Offended" Letter
        3. Gary Patriot's Response to Collection Fee Notice
        4. Gary Patriot's Prehearing Statement
        5. Request for Production of Documents
        6. Gary's Request for Admissions
        7. Gary's Cohan Letter
        8. Gary's Motion to Compel POD
        9. Gary's NOA
        10. Gary's Motion for Rehearing
        11. Gary's Statement of Case
        12. Reply to Gov't Production of Documents
        13. Gary's Statement of Case
        14. Gary's Reply to DOR Response of POD
        15. Gary's Cover Letter for NOA
        16. Gary's Notice of Appeal
        17. Gary's Transcript Letter
        18. Gary's Second Letter to the Clerk
        19. Gary's Second Notice of Appeal
        20. Gary's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
        21. Gary's Filing Fee
        22. Gary's Writ of Certiori
        23. Gary's Record on Appeal
        24. Gary's Reply to Return of DOR
        25. Statement of Case
      5. L.T Oates' Case
        1. Response to Production of Documents
        2. Response to Request for Admissions
        3. Request for Production for Documents
        4. Response to Discovery Threat
        5. Second Motion for Production of Documents
        6. Request for Admissions
        7. Cohan Letter
        8. Letter to Dismiss
        9. Motion for Summary Judgment
      6. Ed Patriot
        1. Petitioner's Request for Production of Documents
        2. Petitioner's Request for Admissions
        3. Motion for Rehearing
        4. Ed's objection to proposed order
      7. Chris Patriot
        1. Affidavit to Expunge Documents
        2. Motion for Rehearing
        3. Notice of Appeal
        4. Cover Letter
        5. 2nd Notice of Appeal
        6. Letter to Clerk of Court
        7. 2nd Revised Notice of Appeal
        8. Transcript Letter
        9. Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
        10. Affidavit of Expenses and Deductions
      8. Chris' Lawsuit on 3rd party summons
        1. Complaint and Summons in a Civil Action
        2. Affidavit for Injunction
        3. Rule to Show Cause
        4. Statute Law on Summonses
        5. Henderson Case on Attestment
      9. Wane Patriot
        1. Patriot's Opposition to Determination
        2. Patriot's Preliminary Tax Statement
        3. Patriot''s Response to POD
        4. Opposition to DOR Preliminary Statement
        5. Patriot's Request for POD
        6. Patriot's Request for Admissions
      10. Lee Roy
        1. Fake Cooperation Letter
        2. Response to Proposed Assessment
        3. Affidavit of Expenses
  3. Courts and Appeals
    1. SC Administrative Law Court
    2. SC Court of Appeals
    3. Rule 203 on Notice of Appeal
    4. Patriot's Motion for Rehearing
    5. Patriot's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
    6. Patriot's Motion for Rehearing
    7. Patriot's Record on Appeals
    8. Patriot's Sample Appeal Brief
  4. Discovery with SC DOR
    1. FOIA to SC DOR on source
    2. Why Hearsay is Important
    3. Request for Production of Documents
    4. Second Motion for Production of Documents
    5. Ralph Patriot's Response to Production of Documents
    6. Mike Freeman's Response to Production of Documents
    7. Mike Freeman's Request for Admissions
    8. LT Request for Admissions
    9. Mike Freeman's Response to Request for Admissions
    10. Mike Freeman's Opposition to Motion to Compel Admissions
    11. Mike Freeman's Opposition to Motion to Compel Production of Documents
    12. Response to Discovery Threat
    13. Mike Freeman's Motion to Compel POD
  5. Important Letters
    1. L.T. Cohan Letter
    2. L.T. Patriot's Letter to Dismiss
  6. Pleadings in Administrative Law Court
    1. Preliminary Tax Statement
    2. Ralph Patriot's Notice of Request for Contested Case Hearing
    3. Gary Patriot's Notice of Request for Contested Case Hearing
    4. Mike Freeman's Response to Respondent's Preliminary Tax Statement
    5. Attachment to Appeal to Administrative Court
    6. Motion for Extension of Time
  7. California
    1. Peymon's Brief
    2. Franchise Tax Letter
  8. Colorado
    1. Response Letter to Judgment
    2. Attachment to Request for Contested Case Hearing
    3. Complaint to State Taxpayer's Advocate
    4. Settlement Letter
    5. Response and Denial of Adjustment
  9. Illinois
    1. Tom Patriot
      1. Dispensation of a Collection Action
  10. Kansas
    1. Marian
      1. Initial Response
      2. Fake Cooperation Letter
      3. Response to KS Problem Resolution
      4. Notice of Appeal
      5. Production of Documents
      6. Marian's 2nd Request for Production of Documents
      7. Marian's Motion for Enlargement of Time
  11. Massachusetts
    1. Mark
      1. Response to Levy
      2. Second Admin Letter
  12. Michigan
    1. James
      1. Response Letter
    2. Guy
      1. Appeal of Denial of Request
  13. Ohio
    1. Tony Patriot
      1. Petition for Reassessment
    2. Charles and Catherine Patriot
      1. Petition for Reassessment
  14. Virginia
    1. Bill Patriot
      1. Fake Cooperation Letter
  15. West Virginia
    1. Julie Patriot
      1. Petition for Reassessment

Patriots Knock-Out DOR!

State Tax Thieves in SC admit wrong doing and agree to stop harassment against Patriot Michael H from Spartanburg , SC. After a short but sharp battle before the administrative law court, DOR realized that they must obey state law and must produce documents showing wages and salaries.

DOR in this and other cases admitted they have no records, which were required by the Due Process Clause in the state and federal Constitutions. Faced with a Constitutional challenge, a procedural one, powerful government attorneys decided to leave patriot non-filers alone rather than take a chance in court and lose a million compliant slaves.

The great Robert Clarkson insisted all along that DOR would back down if we remained true to our believes and stood up for our Constitutional rights. Another dozen patriots who are beset by their state masters are in line for an easy victory after Mike plowed the field.

Patriots Whip Department of Revenue (DOR) in SC, elsewhere

Several years ago at Freedom Law School , Peymon advised Dr Clarkson that Congress required the IRS, in Tax Court, to produce authentic evidence of wages and salaries. The tax return of the sheeple satisfies this requirement.

The non-filers produced no evidence that can be used against them in Tax Court or various state equivalents. Most state laws require that their DOR produce wage affidavits or income statements from the employer or payor, such as the W-2 or 1099 forms.

Frequently, the IRS cannot locate these mandatory documents unless the foolish taxpayer provides them attached to his 1040 form or the intended tax victim produces them to the tax court pursuant to discovery. The non-filers who destroy this essential documentation before their tax court filing cannot be required to produce records they do not have.

Most states' DOR receive their payor information on a printout from the IRS. However, these state's tax procedure codes requires DOR to file a certificate of wages or authenticated wage document with the seal/ribbon from the IRS . This is especially true in administrative courts.

Unfortunately, the state revenue departments and in many cases the federal revenue agency must in ALL court cases produce documents that simply do not exist. In other words if you do not produce the essential documents, they cannot and thus do not have a case.

Last month Patriot Michael from Spartanburg had a telephone hearing in the Carolina Patriots' Greenville office, against the SC DOR before a SC Administrative Law Judge, which is our version of Tax Court. Dr. Clarkson and many great patriots surrounded the speaker phone to assist Michael. However this patriot was well prepared and handled the hearing very well by himself.

The highly paid chief council of the SC tax agency had filed many motions against Michael, including two motions to compel discovery. When the Administrative Law Judge came on the line, the tax liar dropped all of his harassment motions and concentrated on the lies against this fine patriot and on his responses to discovery.

The ALJ ruled against the tax collectors on the first motion. Then DOR Counsel verbally changed the second motion to what he meant to say. The tax villains lost both motions.

Last week, the tax court in Atlanta ruled against District Counsel due to her failure to produce any wage statements. Atlanta patriot Richard Clark stood his ground and did not back down to the assaults and slander against him. He represented himself with Dr. Clarkson sitting at the table with him.  Richard had taken the time to prepare and do his homework.  Dr. Clarkson was only needed for moral support.

The tax court judge ruled that the IRS agent MUST produce wage affidavits or her case would be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The IRS had discovered that one employer no longer existed, another was too small to expend the resources to collect the information and the third one told the IRS to scram! Therefore the IRS had no, none, nada, nothing in the way of evidence against our brave patriot. We missed a total, smashing, recorded victory because Dr. Clarkson was overwhelmed with other cases and unable to prepare responses to discovery on time. Therefore, Richard filed his mandatory pleadings as the Judge noted, "belated."

The tax court judge said Richard had not obeyed the rules because Richard (Dr. Clarkson) did not know what they were. That is not true. We know what the rules are; we just did not have the resources to fully comply. However the PN is taking on new staff members to handle the midribs of tax appeal.


This week SC DOR in the case of long time freedom fighter LT, admitted officially and under oath they had no wage documentation, no official payor statements and no authentic evidence against this courageous freedom fighter.

All courts require that both sides produce in all trials, evidence which is authenticated and legal. IRS printouts just do not count. This admission came in response to LT's request for admissions found on our website under Audit Procedure.

Since the DOR does not have the documentation required by law they must stop harassing LT and all other patriots in SC. Then the PN staff will make all the State tax collectors stop harassing patriots and non-filers.

When Dr. Clarkson read the Admissions from SC DOR, the good Doctor was in shock and used some exuberant language. In effect, the lawyers for the tax collectors told the truth and made an admission that wipes out the state's harassment of non-filers.

Clarkson was quoted in a recent press announcement that "The SC DOR will have to make arrangements with us just as their predecessor, the SC Tax Commission did. Patriots demand that the state tax thieves leave us alone. Twenty-five years ago they agreed to that informal deal."


September 25, 2006

Cynthia Patriot
1776 Freedom Way
Freedomville, SC 12345

SC Dept of Revenue
301 Gervais Street
PO Box 2535
Columbia, SC 29202-2535

Re: File #123456789-1, Case # 234567891-2

You have not responded to my repeated previous correspondence, which was handled by my husband.

Again I deny I owe this “bill”. Your assessment was done arbitrarily and without consideration of my deductions. It was predicated on third-party information, the specific sources of which you apparently do not have. I would like a meeting to discuss this.

My husband met with your agents last week who were capricious in their responses concerning his authority to speak on my behalf. Repeatedly he asked for reconciliation of the inconsistent information between SC and the IRS. The agents claimed they received income information about me from the IRS, yet the IRS denies such information exists. In spite of this issue, you have fraudulently issued an assessment against me.

I have not even had a hearing on this issue, which the law requires. I want this matter resolved and would like to negotiate a settlement.

I will be contacting Governor Sanford about the way this department has treated citizens of South Carolina and violated the law.

Cynthia Patriot



Michael Patriot
1776 Freedom Way
Freedom, SC 12345

SC Dept of Revenue
301 Gervais Street
PO Box 2535
Columbia, SC 29202-2535

Attached sheet to Request for Contested Case Hearing

Brief Statement regarding the issues for which the hearing is requested and the relief requested.

1. For the year in question, taxpayer had dependent children, dependent wife, and deductions for home mortgage interest, medical and dental, tax return information, local taxes, and charitable contributions including church tithes.

2. Taxpayer did not raise "frivolous tax protestor type arguments" but if he did he hereby withdraws them.

3. Taxpayer requests the DOR furnish him the source of the AGI or income tax or wage statements.

4. Taxpayer denies the assessment by DOR and the Wage Statements allegedly received from his employers.

5. DOR denied taxpayer his pre-trial conference.


Response to DOR Threat

Ralph Patriot
123 Freedom Way
Freetown, SC 12345

SC Dept. of Revenue
301 Gervais Street
PO Box 12265
Columbia, SC 29211

Re: Nov. 9, 2006 Letter

This is in response to your threatening letter dated November 9. It is interesting that this is the first response I've received to any of my correspondence. Perhaps other correspondence was sent and I did not receive it. I have not even been able to get the agency to honor a simple FOIA request (I sent a second one recently).

Due to the rudeness of your letter, Mr. Urban, I request you rett it. If you refuse, please send me the name and contact information of your supervisor. I am a citizen of this state and you are a public servant.

In addition to the terse tone of your letter, you mentioned (with no substantiation) "frivolous claims" and "absurd claims." Please provide evidence of these. The obvious time to do this would have been in response to the letters or meeting that allegedly contained such. You also implied that I am "tax protestors." How would that be defined in S.C. law (please provide support)?

In your header you reference 1999. I have received no prior correspondence related to that year from your agency.

I am accumulating my business expenses and deductions for the years in question. Would you like me to send this information to you or somebody else in the department?

I have a right to a proper hearing prior for a final determination.


Ralph Patriot