William and Nancy Johnston's refund claim for 2001 has been delayed by a "request for more information." Since others may encounter this as well, I thought the notice the Johnston's received, and their response, might be of interest.
The Request: LTR 12C
Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service In reply refer to 0625204436
AUSTIN TX 73301-0034 Jan. 27, 2005 LTR 12C R
xxx-xx-xxxx 200112 30
WILLIAM H & NANCY S JOHNSTON
Social Security Number: XXX-XX-XXXX
We received Your Dec. 31, 2001, Form 1040 federal individual income tax return, but we need more information to process the return accurately. Please send us this letter with your reply in the enclosed envelope within 20 days from the date of this letter.
Please enclose only the information requested and any forms, schedules or other information required to support your entries. DO NOT SEND A COPY OF YOUR RETURN, unless specifically instructed to do so. We will issue any refund due to you in about 6 to 8 weeks from the time we receive your response. Since we can give you credit for items only if you give us the information to support them, we may have to increase the tax you owe or reduce your refund if we do not hear from you.
Please provide a form with information that supports the wage or withholding entry of $7,742.05 on line 59, Form 1040. It could be Form W-2, Form W-2G (for gambling winnings), or Form 1099-R (for pension income). If you don't have the form you need, please send us the information in some substitute form. For example, one substitute for Form W-2 could be an earnings statement from your employer which shows year-to-date totals. If you don't have an earnings statement, ask your employer for a copy.
If you have any questions, Please call us toll free at 1-800-829-0922. (1-800-829-4059 Telecommunication Device for the Deaf, TDD). If you prefer, you may write to us at the address shown at the top of the first page of this letter.
Whenever you write to us, Please include your telephone number with the area code, the hours we can reach you, and this letter. Keep a copy of this letter for your records.
Your Telephone Number: ( ) ___________Hours_______________
We apologize for any inconvenience and thank you for your cooperation.
Karen J. Sires
Operations Mgr., Input Correction
Copy of this letter
The Johnston's Initial Response
William H. and Nancy S. Johnston
Certified Mail Receipt: 7004 1350 0002 3015 1729
05 February 2005
Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service
Austin, Texas 73301-0034
Regarding Letter 12C, dated Jan. 27, 2005, copy attached.
Our return for the tax year ending Dec. 31, 2001 was accompanied by a Form 4852, Substitute for Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement. Refer to the General Instructions for completing Form 4852 which state the form is used to correct erroneous information furnished on a Form W-2.
We would be remiss to furnish you with a W-2 which contains erroneous information. We did furnish the name, address and payer identification number associated with a W-2 on the Form 4852. I was unable to convey by contact with the payer the reasons why the W-2 is erroneous.
We believe our return for 2001 is scrupulously accurate and truthful, and we ask you therefore to process the return and forward the overpayment to us at the earliest possible time.
William H. Johnston Nancy S. Johnston
Attachment: Letter 12C, dated Jan. 27, 2005
William H. Johnston
13 June 2005 Certified Mail Receipt 7002 2410 0006 5805 8020
D. Parizek, Operations Manager, Exam SC Support
Internal Revenue Service
1973 North Rulon White Blvd.
Ogden, Utah 84404-0040
Dear Mr. Parizek:
This letter is in response to your letter, PRE-1040X (OSC) (Rev-02-99) dated May 27, 2005, copy enclosed which was accompanied by Publication 2105 and Forms 2297 and 3363. A chronology of actions and communications regarding the matter of a valid tax return between the Internal Revenue Service and myself to date is as follows:
The above chain of events seems to be quite enough for one tax year.
Mr. Parizek I further remind you that there is absolutely no dispute about the fact that $11,531.20 was withheld from my earnings in 2002. Now understand this – that money does not presumptively belong to the treasury of the United States, but it is presumptively mine because I earned it. The only way it could ever belong to the treasury is if all relevant law clearly says it does, with absolutely no ambiguity, doubt, or legal contradiction. I don’t need to explain why I should get to keep it; on the contrary, the burden of proof is on the IRS, and that burden must be met beyond question and in a manner utterly above reproach.
Your determination that the return is frivolous lacks specificity. What is it about the return that does not meet with your approval? What is it about my position that you find frivolous? Which federal court and what are the specific cases which the courts have considered and rejected repeatedly, returns such as mine as being frivolous?
As you well know, Mr. Parizek, the word “wages” is a specifically defined legal term. Payments that do not fit that legal definition are not “wages”. Also, please cite the law that says that every dollar that comes in is “income”. So, since it is possible that money could change hands without being “wages,” you must also concede that some payers are not aware if the money they are paying is legally “wages” or not. Just because some entity sends in a W2 does not prove that “wages” as defined by law have been paid.
The only thing that matters is the actual character of the payments themselves; do they fit the legal definition of “wages” or do they not? If you disagree, please cite the law that says any and all payments to anyone automatically fit the legal definition of “wages.” Also, please cite the law that gives a withholding entity the authority to legally determine and define a certain payment to be “wages” simply by virtue of submitting a W2. And, please cite the law that says W2 forms are legally definitive and cannot be challenged or corrected. Of course, if incorrect W2 forms couldn’t be corrected or challenged, IRS Form 4852 would not exist, but it does.
Further, on line 5 of the Form 4852 I identified the payers name, address and ZIP code and on line 6 of the form I identified the payers identification number. Have you contacted the payer so identified to find out how it was determined that my earnings were wages?
If you can’t cite the proper laws to disprove the above points, you are only confirming the true character of the law. The last word on a person’s lawfully taxable income is not some form filled out by a payer who may not even know the law regarding the character of such payments, but is and must always remain the sworn declaration of the person himself, as evidenced by the contents of his tax return.
I will not sign a Form 2297, Waiver of Statutory Notification of Claim Dissallowance. I will not sign a Form 3363, Acceptance of Proposed Disallownace of Claim for Refund or Credit. I simply will not enter into any arrangement which will aid and abet the IRS in further misapplication of the Internal Revenue laws duly enacted by the Congress. I believe the ambiguity of the information necessary to complete the forms is precisely that.
What is your authority to negotiate with me on behalf of the United States Government over a tax return which has been properly filed? If an individual is not required to file a tax return, the individual is not liable for income tax and may file an income tax return to claim a refund of the income tax withheld.
Please take immediate action to return my property in the amount of $11,531.20 as shown on the 1040 return for 2002 to be an overpayment.
William H. Johnston
Letter, D Parizek to William H. Johnston, dated May 27, 2005
Forms 2297 and 3363