Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Christine L. Davis
Program Manager RICS/IVO
Internal Revenue Service
OGDEN UT 84201
Your response in the above referenced letter is entirely non-responsive to the issues I have raised in previ-
ous correspondence. I have clearly acted in good faith on numerous occasions to ask for a substantive re-
ply from the IRS to review my position and to correct me, point for point, if or where I might be in error.
I have taken great pains to understand the law as it relates to our relationship and your demands and,
while acting in good faith, I have presented my own personal evaluation of the facts and the law on the in-
stant matter to which I get no substantive or meaningful reply other than to be completely ignored and
painted with the broad brush of ‘Frivolous Arguments’ combined with a flyer essentially containing a not
so veiled threat of criminal prosecution for failing to submit to unsubstantiated claims on the part of the
IRS none of which apply to me .
I have no desire to argue about paying any tax which I might owe according to law. In fact, I have of-
fered to pay whatever taxes are owing, conditional upon substantiation that those alleged taxes are in fact,
due and owing according to law. To date I have not received any substantiation whatsoever.
I have given the IRS plenty of time and several opportunities to correct me if I am in error in any way and
neither you nor the IRS have given any substantive correction on my position based on facts or the law.
By operation of law this puts the IRS in the position of having acquiesced by your silence to my stated
position which is clear.
"Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak, or where an in-
quiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading. . . Our revenue system is based on the good
faith of the voluntary taxpayer and the voluntary taxpayers should be able to expect the same from the
government in its enforcement and collection activities. If that is the case we hope our message is clear.
This sort of deception will not be tolerated and if this is routine it should be corrected immediately." U.S.
v. Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299. See also U.S. v. Prudden, 424 F.2d 1021, 1032; Carmine v. Bowen, 64 A.
932.2.7-14
Furthermore, pursuant to your IRS Publication #1 - THE TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS, you have the
obligation to respect my rights;
To Be Informed
Among many points which I have raised in previous correspondence, copies of which are attached and in-
corporated herein by reference as though fully set forth herein, I have the right to clear explanations of the
laws and IRS procedures in all tax forms, instructions, publications, notices, and correspondence. I have
the right to be informed of IRS decisions about my tax accounts and to receive clear explanations of the
outcomes.
You have failed in your duty with your complete non-response and you have violated my rights in doing
so.
To Quality Service
I have the right to receive prompt, courteous, and professional assistance in their dealings with the IRS, to
be spoken to in a way they can easily understand, to receive clear and easily understandable communica-
tions from the IRS, and to speak to a supervisor about inadequate service.
Your letter referenced above is dated Feb. 26 and is in reply to my letter of October 27. A reply 4
months later is not prompt. Total disregard to the substance of my correspondence by labeling it ‘Frivo-
lous’ is not courteous nor professional.
Among other issues raised, I have rightfully challenged allegations of any amount due and have asked
specifically how 26 USC 83 factored into the calculation of the alleged amount owed, to which there has
never been any reply. I have the right to know with a detailed response with precise description of the
calculations done pursuant to section 83.
By merely responding that my ‘arguments are frivolous’ is a clear and deliberate attempt to avoid the is-
sues raised altogether, and is evident that these issues have not been considered and that my documenta-
tion has not been responded to promptly and fairly.
You have violated the Taxpayer Bill of Rights yet once again on this score.
The issues I have raised in this regard (underlying liabilities) have been completely ignored and the IRS
has not presented one iota of documented evidence that I am in fact a taxpayer, that there is or was a tax-
able activity which has been properly assessed and proper notice given and in so doing, or failing to do
so, have denied me my right to a ‘Fair and Just Tax System’.
You have violated my rights once again and have established a clear and obvious pattern of knowingly,
willfully and intentionally violating my rights under color of law which gives me direct recourse to such
willful abuse via 18 USC 241 & 242 ‘Violation of Rights under color of law.
Further, in reference to your letter wherein you have attempted to intimidate me with your comment at the
bottom of page 1 about possibly being subject to criminal prosecution, this would appear to be at attempt
at illegal extortion. Why? Because you have claimed as your authority a number of statutory references
which you have outlined on page 2 of your letter, which, according to page 963 of the Government Pub-
lishing Office - Parallel Table of Authorities relating to Title 26, (the Internal Revenue Code),
(https://www.gpo.gov/help/parallel_table.pdf ) the authorities you have attempted to use to intimidate me
all relate to title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations which pertains only to Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms none of which pertains to me or my activity, as you should know well.
Ms. Davis, please don’t take me for a fool. As you can see, I certainly am not. In fact, for you or any of
the cohorts of yours in the IRS to continue to harass and attempt to browbeat me with your false accusa-
tions, willful denial of rights, abuse of your corporate authority and attempted extortion, it would be
highly foolish for you or anyone to continue with such criminal activity.
Regarding your threats of criminal prosecution, wouldn’t it be lovely to be able to present these issues to
a jury in a court of public record? Just think of the precedent it would set and how that would go viral on
Youtube and the new independent media!
Let’s be clear:
The IRS, Internal Revenue Service, INTERNAL REVENUE, Department of the Treasury - Internal Rev-
enue Service, et al, has already acquiesced and agreed to my clear and unequivocal position based on the
facts and the law that there is ‘NO TAX LIABILITY’ related to the years or the activity in question and
this has been agreed through tacit procuration.
You are hereby put on notice: Should any such fraudulent activity continue under color of law in willful
violation of my rights and the law as outlined in the US Code, IRS publications, Constitution for the
united States of America, any and all related actors will be acting ultra vires and held personally account-
able to my authority to pursue redress of grievances and criminal complaints pursuant to;
The above message, notice and demand is authentic and authorized by me on this the ___ day of ____
2018