Val-David Smithson's First Response To The 'LTR 3176'
From: Val-David Smithson
Date: 15 November 2004
To: Internal Revenue Service
Attn: Mr. Barton, EIN: 0469205624
1973 North Rulon White Blvd.
Ogden, UT 84404
Dear Internal Revenue Service:
This is a timely request and demand for information and clarification specifically relating to your Letter 3176 dated October 29, 2004, a copy of which is attached. I am not refusing or neglecting to pay any internal revenue tax liability to which I am lawfully subject or liable.
In order for me to have a clear understanding of what you allege in your form letter, please provide me with specific answers to each of the following questions along with references to any and all statutes, regulations and/or court decisions that you use to support your answers.
1) What specific part(s) of the information I sent you are you considering "frivolous" or causing you to consider the return "frivolous"?
2) What is your definition of "frivolous"? I was unable to find one in the IRC or the CFR.
3) What specific information did I provide that caused you to allege that I have a "position"?
4) What is your definition of "position"? I was unable to find one in the IRC or the CFR.
5) What, specifically, are the alleged "arguments advanced" in the information sent to you?
Regarding section 6702(a)(1)(A):
6) What specific information, on which the substantial correctness of the self-assessment may be judged, is allegedly not contained in the return?
Regarding section 6702(a)(1)(B):
7) What specific information contained in the return on its face indicates that the self-assessment is substantially incorrect?
Regarding section 6702(a)(2)(A):
8) What position, that you allege I have made, is "frivolous"?
Regarding section 6702(a)(2)(B):
9) What appears on the return that you allege is intended to delay or impede the administration of Federal income tax law?
10) Where are the corresponding regulations to section 6702 found?
11) What "claim" that you allege I made have the courts "repeatedly rejected as without merit"?
12) Which court cases support rejecting the alleged "claim"?
13) What information is allegedly missing that the law requires on the Form 1040?
14) What cite(s) in the regulations apply to the alleged missing information and to the requirements for entering information on the Form 1040?
15) Which of the "certain Internal Revenue code Requirements" for the Form 1040 are allegedly not in compliance?
16) Did you receive Form 4852 attached to the Form 1040?
Further, I request and demand any and all due process to which I am entitled or which is in any way appropriate and/or available to me under any provision or practice of common, statutory, and/or administrative law or protocol-- including, but not limited to, that to which your notice refers; and incorporate by reference into this request and demand all relevant information included on or in that notice, a copy of which is attached.
I declare that I make no admissions as to my status, the legitimacy of your implicit or explicit assertions, or the fitness of any particular legal or administrative protocol by responding to your notice or by requesting and demanding the due process referenced above.
I expect and require meaningful clarification as to the nature of-- and reason for-- the "frivolous" allegation, the process by which any and all relevant determinations reflected in and by your notice were arrived at, and anything else pertinent to the matter.
You have 30 days from the date of this request and demand to respond. In addition, I respectfully request an additional 30 days from the date of your next response to study and evaluate your answers. I choose to have all correspondence in writing.
In the event that you find your determination is without merit, please process my return for refund expeditiously.
All Rights Reserved