U.S. Court Of Appeals Soundly Rejects IRS Plea To Soften Ruling In Schulz v IRS
On January 29, 2005, we reported under the headline, "Dramatic Development," that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit had issued a decision in Schulz v. IRS. The Court held that taxpayers cannot be compelled by the IRS to turn over personal and private property to the IRS, absent a federal court order.
"...absent an effort to seek enforcement through a federal court, IRS summonses apply no force to taxpayers, and no consequence whatever can befall a taxpayer who refuses, ignores, or otherwise does not comply with an IRS summons until that summons is backed by a federal court order.[a taxpayer] cannot be held in contempt, arrested, detained, or otherwise punished for refusing to comply with the original IRS summons, no matter the taxpayer's reasons, or lack of reasons for so refusing."
On behalf of its client, IRS, the DOJ had filed a motion with the Court, requesting that the Court amend its decision in Schulz.
DOJ stated in its motion that, "...the Court's opinion threatens to seriously impede the effective administration and enforcement of the nation's tax laws."
DOJ chastised the Court for "creating a false impression," and "misapprehending" and "misunderstanding" and "misstating" and being "inaccurate," regarding the "consequences that flow from the issuance of an IRS summons."
On June 29, 2005, the Court issued its much-anticipated decision regarding the government's motion to amend the Court's earlier ruling. With a firm reliance on the Court's primary role of protecting the People's individual, unalienable Right to Due Process guaranteed by the 5th and 14th Amendments, the court soundly rejected the government's pleading.Writing for the three-judge panel, Judge Straub wrote, in part:
".The government has moved to amend our per curiam opinion, reported at Schulz v. IRS., 395 F.3d 463 (2nd Cir. 2005) ("Schulz I"). Having considered the arguments of the parties, we grant the petition to rehear for only the limited purpose and to the extent necessary to clarify our prior opinion and hold that: 1) absent an effort to seek enforcement through a federal court, IRS summonses "to appear, to testify, or to produce books, papers, records, or other data," 26 U.S.C. Section 7604, issued "under the internal revenue law, " id., apply no force to the target, and no punitive consequences can befall a summoned party who refuses, ignores, or otherwise does not comply with an IRS summons until that summons is backed by a federal court order;
2) if the IRS seeks enforcement of a summons through the federal courts, those subject to the proposed order must be given a reasonable opportunity to contest the government's request; 3) if a federal court grants a government request for an order of enforcement then any individual subject to that order must be given a reasonable opportunity to comply and cannot be held in contempt or subjected to indictment under 26 U.S.C. section 7210 for refusing to comply with the original, unenforced IRS summons, no matter the taxpayer's reasons or lack of reasons for so refusing." [page 3].
Soundly rejecting the government's view of Congress's tax enforcement scheme as "Draconian," the Court said:
".the government appears to argue alternatively, or in combination, that: 1) the government may use the federal courts to punish taxpayers who disobey an IRS summons even if the summons is never enforced by court order; 2) if an IRS summons is enforced by a court order, the court may punish disobedience of the IRS summons before providing the taxpayer an opportunity to comply with the court's order; or 3) if an IRS summons is enforced by a court order, the court may punish disobedience of the IRS summons even if the taxpayer complies with the court's order. In our view, expressed in Schulz I, none of these proposals is consistent with the comprehensive tax-enforcement scheme in which 26 U.S.C. sections 7210, 7604(a) and 7604(b) are situated, constitutional due process, or the relevant precedents of this Court and the United States Supreme Court." [ page 5].
Trumpeting the primary role of the Judiciary of protecting the People from unconstitutional acts of the other two branches of the government, the Court went on to say:
".the IRS summons is administratively issued but its enforcement is only by federal court authority in an adversary proceeding affording the opportunity for challenge and complete protection to the witness." [page 9] (emphasis in the original).
Most significantly, the Court held, relying on a 1920 decision by the United States Supreme Court, that the principles of due process apply to all administrative orders. We take that to mean the Court's order applies not only to IRS first party summonses, but also to IRS third party summonses, and to IRS levies and liens.
In what may be the most significant sentence in the 13-page decision, the court stated: "The rule of due process upon which we relied in Schulz I, and upon which we rely now, can be stated thus; any legislative scheme that denies subjects an opportunity to seek judicial review of administrative orders except by refusing to comply, and so put themselves in immediate jeopardy of possible penalties 'so heavy as to prohibit resort to that remedy,' Oklahoma Operating Co. v. Love, 252 U.S. 331, 333 (1920), runs afoul of the due process requirements of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments." [Page 10].
Although the objects in contention in Schulz were IRS administrative summonses, it is unavoidable that the Due Process issues raised and articulated by the Court in Schulz have direct implication for all forms of routine IRS administrative process including liens, levies and seizures. This decision reiterates those constitutional principles.
The Court's reaffirmation of Schulz I is clear: any legislative scheme that forces a taxpayer to either capitulate to an IRS administrative demand-- without access to judicial review , or risk bearing the pains of IRS's wrath if they refuse to comply, violates the Constitution.
Story Related Links:
(suggest RIGHT-Click to download all Court documents)
Click Here to Read the U.S. Court of Appeals ruling denying IRS's request to rewrite its decision (June 29, 2005)
Click Here to Read the IRS's motion to "gut" the Appellate Court decision in Schulz v. IRS that "threatened the tax system." (March 2005)
Click Here to Read the U.S. Court of Appeal's decision requiring a federal court order to enforce an IRS administrative order. (January 2005)
Click Here to Read our 1-29-05 news update, "Dramatic Development" announcing the Second Circuit's original decision and the associated WTP Press Release.
Click Here to Read our 3-9-05 news update about IRS's motion to gut the Schulz decision.
***********DISCLAIMER***********
The material contained in this package does not constitute legal or tax advice. This material has been prepared for you at your request for educational and informational purposes and is intended for "nontaxpayers".
"The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax assessment and collection. They relate to taxpayers, and not to nontaxpayers. The latter are without their scope. No procedure is prescribed for nontaxpayers, and no attempt is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course of law. With them [nontaxpayers] Congress does not assume to deal, and they are neither of the subject nor of the object of the revenue laws". Economy Plumbing and Heating Co. v. United States, 470 F. 2d 585 (1972)
"The laws of Congress in respect to those matters do not extend into the territorial limits of the states, but have force only in the District of Columbia, and other places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national government." Caha v. United States, 152 U.S. 211, 215, 14 S. Ct. 513 (1894)
If you are a "taxpayer" defined at §7701(a)14, information can be obtained at http://www.irs.gov.
None of this documentation is intended to interfere with the proper administration or enforcement of the internal revenue laws; nor can there be found any false, deceptive, or misleading commercial statement regarding the excludability of income known to be false or fraudulent in relation to any material matter or any information pertaining to the organizing or selling of an abusive tax shelter, plan, or arrangement that might incite taxpayers to attempt to violate the internal revenue laws, to unlawfully evade the assessment or collection of their federal tax liabilities, or to unlawfully claim improper tax refunds.
We assume no responsibility for the success or failure of this information to produce the desired effects of the reader; however, we will ensure that this material has been prepared in accordance with the 50 Titles of the United States Code, Code of Federal Regulations, and respective Internal Revenue Manuals. All codes, regulations, and procedures are adhered to in the strictest sense. The codes, regulations, and procedures will evidence any due-process violations. The method and utilization of this material is strictly the choice of the reader.
If you do not agree with the above DISCLAIMER and/or material enclosed in this package, please go back and review the educational materials you were provided with when you signed up for our services. This includes any literature, conference calls, and/or information on our website. If anyone has told you differently than what is in the above DISCLAIMER, please forward the above DISCLAIMER to him/her and notify us immediately of the person who is giving you incorrect information.
Club Mission
Guide our members to an abundant receiving/giving life of financial, health, emotional and spiritual freedoms through inner awakening.
Funding Meter Early Bronze 50% Bonus Close-out
It is so cool & exciting, to say the least, to send people to a site where they can benefit greatly in every way & without spending a dime out of pocket.Wow!!! How wonderful!!
Ambassadors: We are now taking applications for our new Ambassador program as we launch our 'Early' Bronze program. You can spread the word about the Early Bronze program with our Got Debt cards and Badges.
Earn $100 per membership and $500 each AR upfront. Earn $10,000 - $25,000 from each AR referred on the backend.
You cannot get what you’ve never had unless you’re willing to do what you’ve never done.
---------------
When I despair, I remember that all through history the ways of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall. Think of it - always. - Mahatma Gandhi
---------------
The Lion asked the Wizard one time, "When does a slave become a king?"
Intro & Prosperity Calls
