Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
KC Johnson on Report Claiming Seligmann Owes Taxes; Detroit News Says IRS Lien for $6.5 Million
Topic Started: Feb 25 2011, 08:58 AM (7,215 Views)
chatham
Member Avatar

IMO, false accusation. IM other O. start of a frame.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://www.live5news.com/Global/story.asp?S=12469309

Ladson woman indicted on charges of using fake IRS forms

May 12, 2010

COLUMBIA, SC (WCSC) - A Ladson woman was indicted in federal court Wednesday on charges of using a false IRS document.

According to U.S. Attorney William Nettles, Jenene Gourdine, 38, knowingly used a fabicated IRS form that falsely stated that the IRS had released its tax lien on property owned by her spouse when, in fact, the IRS had not released the tax lien.

She used the form in June, 2006.

The maximum penalty that Gourdine could receive is a fine of $250,000 and imprisonment for five years.

Nettles said in a release that the case was investigated by agents of the Treasury Department Inspector General for Tax Administration.


This woman used a false form to REMOVE a lien (likely to improve her credit).

The Treasury (IRS) took the matter very seriously.

Will the Treasury also take seriously the forging of a lien against a taxpayer who does not owe money?

Possibly in order to bring pressure on a litigant in a civil suit?

(That remains to be seen...)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
Quasimodo
Mar 3 2011, 01:14 PM
THIS IS REALLY NOT HARD TO DO...


Posted Image
.
That one is probably true though, just with Fishy Figures.

:uhoh:
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100522002639AA2BOhd

Q.

I have a situation where the IRS made an error in assessing my taxes last year and when I did not pay them the taxes that i never owed due to their computer error they eventually filed a tax lien against my property. After months of trying to prove to them their error by sending in all kinds of documentation, today I finally received a notice from them confirming that I was correct and that they indeed made an error in their assessment but the notice said nothing about the tax lien that they filed because I didn't pay them the wrong amount of taxes that I never owed them in the first place. Will they remove the lien automatically? If not what can I do to get it nullified? My credit is probably already damaged because of this. Thanks.


Quote:
 
Best Answer -

When an account balance is reduced to zero, the IRS lien system automatically releases the lien.

In your case, if the lien was filed because of an unresolved error by IRS, you should file Form 12153 to request that the lien be "withdrawn." This is a formal determination that it was filed in error to begin with. A release indicates that there was a delinquency that was paid while a withdrawal means the lien should never have been filed in the first place.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://www.backtaxeshelp.com/Release_Tax_Lien.html

What to Do if the IRS Files a Tax Lien in Error

The IRS occasionally files a tax lien notice when you don't owe anything. Perhaps you paid your bill late, and the IRS neglected to update your account. If this happens, under the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights you are entitled to a "Certificate of Release." The "Certificate of Release" will state that the lien was filed in error.

It will then be your job to mail or deliver photocopies of the release to the three credit bureaus- Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax. This will minimize the damage to your credit rating caused by the IRS error.


Nice that the IRS doesn't clean up it's own mess...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 

Bristol Virginia council candidate says IRS tax lien was a mistake

April 17, 2010

(snip)

“The Internal Revenue Service is not permitted to discuss a particular or specific taxpayer’s tax matter or their taxes based on federal disclosure regulations and federal law,” agency spokesman Jim DuPree wrote in an e-mail. “Furthermore, it would be inappropriate for the IRS to provide comment on any real examples, hypothetical examples or suppositions regarding a taxpayer or taxpayers.”


I suppose this is about all we will hear from the IRS in the Seligmann case, too--leaving the news story to be retracted in
tiny print on page 44.

However, the Seligmann case may involve a crime, and that should be pointed out in response to the IRS if it declines
comment.

(Does it decline comment if crime has been committed? Does it approve or disapprove, or have no comment, on
the use of the IRS to harass litigants in civil suits?)

IOW, if its office made a mistake, and that mistake went public because the office filed the lien where it could
be found by a reporter; then the IRS has the duty to clear up its mistake and retract.

If the IRS was not involved and the lien was part of a crime, then that is well within what the IRS can, and needs
to, comment on.

(IE, don't settle for bureaucratic blather.)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://www.atxcommunity.com/topic/6653-irs-lifted-a-79064-tax-lien-on-schwarzenegger/

9 February 2010

The Internal Revenue Service has lifted a $79,064 tax lien on California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

A computer glitch in Schwarzenegger’s payroll tax records in 2004 and 2005 prompted the IRS to begin investigating the former action star and bodybuilder (see IRS Places $79,064 Lien on Schwarzenegger). The IRS placed the lien last May in the mistaken belief that Schwarzenegger had not paid payroll taxes for his household help when he actually had, according to the governor’s office.

Schwarzenegger did not know until late last year that the IRS had been sending notices to his home instead of his office because he does not receive mail at home as a security precaution, according to the Associated Press.

Schwarzenegger will still be assessed $20.50 for administrative fees, but that’s far less than the original lien of nearly $80,000. The IRS released the lien on Jan. 20, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.


This still doesn't fit the Seligmann case, since the IRS surely has the Seligmann's home residence; and the Seligmann
notice is improperly made out (it doesn't list his address). How that passed muster at the IRS is a good question.
(Maybe it is a fake document?)

But Reade and Arnold together should be an unbeatable combination!


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Quasimodo
Mar 3 2011, 01:41 PM
Quote:
 
IF

the balance due has the name of a third party, i.e., accountant, attorney, etc., and a NFTL is being filed ensure that the address on the NFTL is the taxpayer’ s. A NFTL should never show the name and/or address of a third party or the names of corporate officers. When dealing with "c/o" be sure that the name and address on the NFTL is that of the taxpayer.


IE, Either the Seligmann document is therefore improperly made out;

or else it is a fake.

If it is improperly made out, then who made the (obvious) error? Has this person ever made out such forms before?
If so, was this document approved by a manager in this form?

I did not see the NFTL, but you post as if you did. Maybe I just missed the link!

Does it show the agent's name?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

kbp
Mar 3 2011, 10:57 PM
I did not see the NFTL, but you post as if you did. Maybe I just missed the link!

Does it show the agent's name?
It's on the NET at :

http://download.gannett.edgesuite.net/detnews/2011/pdf/seligmann_lien.pdf
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00001001----000-.html

United States Criminal Code
Title 18 Chapter 47

§ 1001. Statements or entries generally

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—

(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;

(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or

(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;

shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
§ 1018. Official certificates or writing

Whoever, being a public officer or other person authorized by any law of the United States to make or give a certificate or other writing, knowingly makes and delivers as true such a certificate or writing, containing any statement which he knows to be false, in a case where the punishment thereof is not elsewhere expressly provided by law, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
§ 1030. Fraud and related activity in connection with computers

(a) Whoever—

(snip)

(2) intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains—

(snip)

(B) information from any department or agency of the United States; or

(C) information from any protected computer;

(3) intentionally, without authorization to access any nonpublic computer of a department or agency of the United States, accesses such a computer of that department or agency that is exclusively for the use of the Government of the United States or, in the case of a computer not exclusively for such use, is used by or for the Government of the United States and such conduct affects that use by or for the Government of the United States;

(snip)

(5)
(A) knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;

(B) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or

(C) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage and loss.[1]

(6) knowingly and with intent to defraud traffics (as defined in section 1029) in any password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization, if—

(A) such trafficking affects interstate or foreign commerce; or

(B) such computer is used by or for the Government of the United States; [2]

(7) with intent to extort from any person any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any—

(A) threat to cause damage to a protected computer;

(B) threat to obtain information from a protected computer without authorization or in excess of authorization or to impair the confidentiality of information obtained from a protected computer without authorization or by exceeding authorized access; or

(C) demand or request for money or other thing of value in relation to damage to a protected computer, where such damage was caused to facilitate the extortion;

shall be punished as provided in subsection (c) of this section.

(b) Whoever conspires to commit or attempts to commit an offense under subsection (a) of this section shall be punished as provided in subsection (c) of this section.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000514----000-.html

United States Criminal Code

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 25 > § 514


§ 514. Fictitious obligations


(a) Whoever, with the intent to defraud—

(1) draws, prints, processes, produces, publishes, or otherwise makes, or attempts or causes the same, within the United States;

(2) passes, utters, presents, offers, brokers, issues, sells, or attempts or causes the same, or with like intent possesses, within the United States; or

(3) utilizes interstate or foreign commerce, including the use of the mails or wire, radio, or other electronic communication, to transmit, transport, ship, move, transfer, or attempts or causes the same, to, from, or through the United States,
any false or fictitious instrument, document, or other item appearing, representing, purporting, or contriving through scheme or artifice, to be an actual security or other financial instrument issued under the authority of the United States, a foreign government, a State or other political subdivision of the United States, or an organization, shall be guilty of a class B felony.

(b) For purposes of this section, any term used in this section that is defined in section 513 (c) has the same meaning given such term in section 513 (c).

(c) The United States Secret Service, in addition to any other agency having such authority, shall have authority to investigate offenses under this section.


513 (C)

(c) For purposes of this section—

(1) the term “counterfeited” means a document that purports to be genuine but is not, because it has been falsely made or manufactured in its entirety;

(2) the term “forged” means a document that purports to be genuine but is not because it has been falsely altered, com­pleted, signed, or endorsed, or contains a false addition thereto or insertion therein, or is a combination of parts of two or more genuine documents;

(3) the term “security” means—

(A) a note, stock certificate, treasury stock certificate, bond, treasury bond, debenture, certificate of deposit, interest coupon, bill, check, draft, warrant, debit instrument as defined in section 916(c) of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, money order, traveler’s check, letter of credit, warehouse receipt, negotiable bill of lading, evidence of indebtedness, certificate of interest in or participation in any profit-sharing agreement, collateral-trust certificate, pre-reorganization certificate of subscription, transferable share, investment contract, voting trust certificate, or certificate of interest in tangible or intangible property;

(B) an instrument evidencing ownership of goods, wares, or merchandise;

(C) any other written instrument commonly known as a security;

(D) a certificate of interest in, certificate of participation in, certificate for, receipt for, or warrant or option or other right to subscribe to or purchase, any of the foregoing; or

(E) a blank form of any of the foregoing;
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
§ 1038. False information and hoaxes

(a) Criminal Violation.—

(1) In general.— Whoever engages in any conduct with intent to convey false or misleading information under circumstances where such information may reasonably be believed and where such information indicates that an activity has taken, is taking, or will take place that would constitute a violation of chapter 2, 10, 11B, 39, 40, 44, 111, or 113B of this title, section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284), or section 46502, the second sentence of section 46504, section 46505(b)(3) or (c), section 46506 if homicide or attempted homicide is involved, or section 60123 (b) of title 49, shall—

(A) be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both;

(B) if serious bodily injury results, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and

(C) if death results, be fined under this title or imprisoned for any number of years up to life, or both.


[(may or may not apply)]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Speeches&ContentRecord_id=3ff3d037-802a-23ad-43e1-01715bdff9f7&Region_id=&Issue_id=4b0069d9-f917-0d5f-0de0-9c66cadfd9e9

Criminalizing Forgery of Federal Documents Senate Floor
Statement by
U.S. Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla)


September 28, 2004

INTRODUCTION

Mr. President, the recent CBS incident involving the record of President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard sheds light on the need for a federal statute generally criminalizing the forgery of federal government documents. I believe that when it comes to crimes involving the fabrication of federal documents or writings, the federal government has an obligation to step in and show the offenders there are serious consequences.

Many experts initially doubted the authenticity of the memos in question, which negatively and falsely characterized President Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard. We now believe these memos were created on a modern word-processing computer, rather the 1970s era typewriter as alleged in the original CBS story.

(snip)

GENESIS OF THE LEGISLATION

After learning of the CBS scandal, I was curious about the penalty for the forgery of federal documents. In seeking the answer to this question, I called the Department of Justice. Their Congressional Relations Office promptly responded, "It depends."

The Justice Department stated that similar cases were often charged under the general sections of the Fraud and False Statements Chapter of the United States Criminal Code. These sections have proven quite useful to the prosecutors at the Department of Justice.

I learned of a loophole in the existing law regarding forgery and false statements. I learned that there are no general sections of the United States Criminal Code for Forgery and Counterfeiting. Officials from the Department of Justice noted the absence of a general standalone statute that criminalizes the actions of those who would forge documents of the federal government, regardless of the end they seek to achieve or what the documents are. Currently, the prosecution of such actions depends completely on the context and how forged documents were the means to an end.

Chapter 25 of Title 18 of the United States Code addresses various offenses in Counterfeiting and Forgery. The current 45 sections of the Counterfeiting and Forgery chapter essentially fall into four broad categories:

1. Financial obligations (including notes, postage, checks, securities, bonds, coins, money orders, debentures, et cetera),
2. Military and naval discharge certificates or official passes,
3. Transportation matters and motor vehicle documents, and
4. The seals of agencies (including courts, departments, and other agencies).

PIECEMEAL ENACTMENT OF COUNTERFEITING AND FORGERY CODE

The legislative history of the forty-five sections of the Counterfeiting and Forgery Chapter indicates that the sections were enacted piecemeal without a unifying, overarching section. If forgery takes place but does not fall into one of these sections, there is no penalty.

CONTRAST WITH FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS CODE

Chapter 47 of Title 18 of the United States Code regarding Fraud and False Statements also contains disparate sections enacted piecemeal.

In contrast, however, the Fraud and False Statements Chapter does have an overarching section, Section 1001 that unifies its disparate, piecemeal parts.

In light of the recent situation involving President Bush's record, these broad, disparate sections need to include in general the fabrication of federal writings or memos.

EXAMINING THE APPLICABILITY OF OTHER STATUTES

In speaking with officials from the Department of Justice, I have also become aware of concerns over whether the existing statute regarding fraud, 18 § USCS § 1001, can be used in this CBS incident. Chapter 47 on Fraud and False Statements specifically condemns false statements, but only those with the intent of defrauding the federal government.

There are questions whether the "intent to defraud the United States or any agency thereof" is applicable or whether it could successfully be argued that instead it was the voters of the United States who were intentionally defrauded, distinguishing in certain fashion "United States" from "voters" or the like.

[Can knowingly inducing the to commence a fraudulent investigation--which uses its resources to follow a false
lead--be considered 'defrauding the United States'?]


These concerns validate the need to criminalize the specific act of forging federal documents. Technically, in the CBS instance, it could be argued that the forged federal document did not monetarily or otherwise tangibly take away from the federal government. I would argue that it did harm the federal government by infringing on the federal government's copyright on its work. It certainly did affect millions of Americans by giving them a false and misleading impression about a presidential candidate. But it needs to be clarified.

[See above.]

NEED TO PROTECT FEDERAL SERVANTS GOVERNMENT-WIDE

As placed under Chapter 25 of Title 18, my bill would criminalize general forgery of federal government documents, including those that characterize or purport to characterize official federal activity, service, contract, obligation, duty, or property.

If someone attempts to forge, in the name of an official of the federal government, a document or memo that addresses an official government duty or act, that person should be held accountable. There needs to be a federal law prohibiting such forgery generally so that prosecution of the same does not fall through the cracks.

Currently, there is no catch-all section to address all forged federal writings, such as a note from one official to another about federal service.

I serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee and I honor those who serve in the National Guard. Not only has the CBS incident resulted in slander to the honorable National Guard service of President Bush, it also highlights the risk to the records of other military service members and, moreover, ALL federal servants government-wide.

A civil servant at the General Services Administration, which the Environment and Public Works Committee I chair happens to oversee, is equally deserving of being protected from a forgery of his or her work records. Right now there is no section in the forgery chapter of the US Code that specifically addresses protection for General Services Administration personnel. This omission is a problem we must correct.

PUBLISHING FORGED DOCUMENTS

My legislation also includes language to condemn those who, knowingly or negligently failing to know, transmit or present any such forged federal writing or record, which characterizes official federal activity or service. This general criminalization of publishing forged documents follows existing provisions of the forgery code. If a major news network broadcasts a story based on alleged federal documents, they must take the responsibility to verify those records.

(snip)


CONGRATULATING HARD WORK OF THOSE WHO DISCOVERED THE TRUTH

If it were not for the work of many astute people working through the Internet and otherwise, this travesty would not have been on its way to being exposed and fully prosecuted criminally. CBS and its surrogates pointedly disparaged the people who told the truth as mere second-class journalists of the Internet and cable television and talk-radio persuasions. Rather, it is CBS that has proven itself to be of even less than second-class journalism.

I note that numerous pundits have been discussing recently that the very vitality of the networks is faltering with the explosion of other media. Pundits have cited CBS's additional poor judgment in failing to cover the political conventions as well as other media outlets did. CBS owes a separate apology to those truth-tellers whom it slandered and who have shown better judgment than CBS.

MEDIA BIAS

I know that it can be difficult to communicate information without also conveying one's personal position on a matter. However, in a free society such as ours, the news media has a responsibility to work to be fair and balanced-to tell both sides of the story without letting journalistic spin cloud their judgment.

Television, print, and the Internet are powerful media. They shape our lives and provide some part of the education of our children, whether we like it or not. I believe the time has come for the media to take responsibility for its actions-rather than manipulate public opinion to lobby the causes and politicians the media support. Facts, not conclusions or erroneous records, should be reported. Elections are a powerful example ofwhy journalists must hold themselves to the highest of standards. People can then synthesize information for themselves.

(snip)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply