State DOR

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.

SMASHING VICTORY—THE WIPE OUT!!

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."

FOLLOW-UP LETTER

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.

Sincerely,
Cynthia Patriot

TOP

ATTACHMENT TO CONTEST A CASE HEARING

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.

TOP

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.

Sincerely,

Ralph Patriot

TOP