Thursday, November 19, 2009
Court Lacks Jurisdiction to Order IRS to Apologize to Taxpayer
The Tax Court yesterday ruled that it lacks jurisdiction to order the IRS to apologize to a taxpayer. Caldwell v. Commissioner, T.C. Summ. Op. 2009-169 (Nov. 18, 2009):
The part of Caldwell's motion which we characterize as a "Request for Apology" asks that we require the IRS to enter into the record "a written apology to the Petitioner, signed by the Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service" ...
The Tax Court may exercise jurisdiction only to the extent authorized by Congress. See sec. 7442; Naftel v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985). ...
Despite the Court's warning to him in the previous case that the Court's powers to grant relief are limited, Caldwell has not stated why he believes that we have jurisdiction to order the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to apologize to him ...
The IRS objected to the Request for Apology on the ground that Congress has not, through section 7430 (relating to administrative or litigation costs) or otherwise, authorized us to grant such relief. [Fn.3] We agree.
We lack jurisdiction to order the IRS to grant the relief requested in the Request for Apology, or similar relief, and will accordingly deny the Request for Apology.
[Fn. 3]: The IRS further argued that the Federal Government's sovereign immunity would prevent us from granting such relief. Since nothing of which we are aware even suggests we could grant the relief, we need not consider whether sovereign immunity prevents us from granting it.
Is the apology due because citizen was a Democrat and therefore, doesn't have to pay taxes?
I am just trying to figure out the new rules in Obama's administration.
Posted by: Borris | Nov 19, 2009 6:24:04 PM
An apology is an admission of wrong doing, and therefore would be an acknowledgment that damages are owed. Relatedly, the IRS is known for pursuing people even after losing in court; an apology would be a bulwark against double jeopardy.
Posted by: dusty | Nov 19, 2009 4:05:04 PM
I read the case and it appears that Caldwell did NOT follow the stipulations for relief as requested by the court. As such, the court had no reason to grant motion for any relief, and has stated, since requests for apologies are not listed in the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations for title 26 Federal income Tax, then it does NOT exist, and therefore, is outside the jurisdiction of the court to order an apology. Remember, we are talking about Federal law, which operates OUTSIDE and not under the Constitution!
Posted by: Richard Ayala | Nov 19, 2009 3:17:48 PM
It's actually nice, even if mistaken, for one of the three branches of the government to defer to the law once in a while. Rather than doing the "right" thing. Rothschild's and central bank, what is this 1939?
Posted by: Pat Patterson | Nov 19, 2009 3:14:01 PM
Oh and as for Caldwell, in earlier drafts of his motion to the court he asked for an apology, flowers, and a copy of Julia Robert's most recent tax return.
Posted by: IRS guy | Nov 19, 2009 2:29:19 PM
Yes, that's right, robertssgt40. I've worked for the IRS since 1983 and in that time I get regular directives from Elders of Zion Central in the Bahamas on how to work my taxpayer cases. Every morning at precisely 10:15 AM EST we put on our tinfoil receptor hats and wait for the daily feed.
Posted by: IRS guy | Nov 19, 2009 2:26:46 PM
I see from the comments it's pretty hard not to pun around about this. The IRS is all about the self-parity (you say pair-uh-tee, I say pair-uh-dee ...let's call the whole thing off).
Posted by: davis.br | Nov 19, 2009 2:02:51 PM
Just another example of a government that does not believe that it is responsible to the people.
Posted by: Political Observer | Nov 19, 2009 1:15:34 PM
If indeed the IRS should apologize, can't the tax court throw the plaintiff a bone and put a throwaway line in the dicta saying that the IRS owes Caldwell an apology, without of course making a federal case out of it.
Posted by: Kazinski | Nov 19, 2009 12:24:40 PM
Without getting to the merits of the apology claim, hasn't the government already waived its immunity to the extent the Tax Court (and U.S. District Court in the case of suits for refunds) provides a forum for citizens to claim against the government?
Posted by: Richard Fagin | Nov 19, 2009 11:26:40 AM
That's right robertsgt40 and further, the Jewish media, with it's emphasis on
OPEC and oil, distracts us from noticing that the Jews own all the gas stations, or at least they do here in Piedmont AZ.
Posted by: ghh | Nov 19, 2009 11:14:36 AM
Imagine my complete, total, and absolute lack of surprise.
Posted by: jdogg | Nov 19, 2009 10:47:48 AM
FYI-The IRS is the collection agency for the PRIVATELY owned, Rothschild dominated central bank that has screwed the nation(as well as the rest of the world) into the ground. When this parasite is abolished, we can move towards an honest banking system. But since the banksters own congress, do look for a removal of the boot off your neck any time soon
Posted by: robertsgt40 | Nov 19, 2009 7:49:00 AM
Well, of course -- not even Congress can give the court jurisdiction over God.
Posted by: Ron Coleman | Nov 19, 2009 9:44:00 PM