Search
Topics
  Home  ·  Topics  ·  Top 10  
Modules
· Home
· AvantGo
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics

Random Headlines

Re-Branded Politics
[ Re-Branded Politics ]

·How to Get Rid Of the Virginia Beach City Council
·Proof that the 7th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution works
·Virginia & the Grand Obama Party
·Frank Wagner and the Grand Obama Party [GOP]
·Liberalism has no place for God or the Constitution
·French communist-anarchist Joseph Déjacque coined "libertarian"
·Mandela, Obama,,Clinton, Carter ~ Marxists All
·The Unchallenged Obama Executive Decision
·Missing From the Obama Presidential Podium : The Seal of TOTUS

CNN LAW
·Court upholds limits on Navy sonar training
·Slain wife accuses husband from the grave
·Prosecutors drop parent-killing case
·Priest accused of lying in mob investigation
·Inmate shot dead after brazen escape
·Juror: Judge and jury pressured me to convict
·Man convicted for Internet hoax death
·Zoloft killer's 30-year sentence appealed
·Girl who shielded mom is a hero at school
·Holloway disappearance hits cold case file

read more...

Disclosures Competition Realty

Conventions
User Agreement
Disclaimer
Disclosure
Operational Philosophy
Privacy Policy
 Welcome To One of The Best Sites on The Web

Competition Realty''s Principal Broker has an interest in this site. buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online

Voter News and Issues HELPcom.Net

Welcome to HELPcom.NET Your Source of Voter News and Issues

Mission Statement

About HELPcom.NET

HELPcom.NET, LLC [Help Communications Network] focuses on promoting good government practices: designating officials who sacrifice the common good to special interests. We will help Americans to shine a light on those who betray the public trust:

If a public official misuses his position to demand campaign contributions, HELPcom.NET will find creative ways to seek civil remedies.
If a witness is threatened or punished because he/she reported official misconduct, HELPcom.NET will fight back on behalf of the witness.
If a government agency withholds information to which the public is entitled, HELPcom.NET will help enforce legal rules regarding disclosure.
If a group libels an honest public servant, HELPcom.NET will help the victim defend his reputation.

HELPcom.NET will seize opportunities like these, bringing high-impact public exposures of evil doers. The majority of our reports and stories will focus on real people and their stories about the lack of government integrity. Not only do these people need and deserve our support, their stories can serve as powerful tools to seize public attention and move public opinion. HELPcom.NET will work with the press, government investigators, and other public interest groups to make sure that these peoples' stories are heard. In the process, HELPcom.NET will build a non-partisan investigative alliance that transcends specific issues. Our aim is to encourage officials to be open about their values and to act based upon their honest and best assessment of the public interest.

As we do this, over time HELPcom.NET will develop a network of public interest groups, sympathetic government investigators and media contacts ... a far-reaching, more mainstream version of the conservative league of individuals that has been so effective. We will work with that network to focus public attention on government integrity and to educate the public about dishonest or disingenuous government officials. If history is any indication, this type of network can have a substantial impact on public opinion.

To report official misconduct of , a public official who is violating his public trust by misuse of his position to demand campaign contributions, threatened or punished a witness because he/she reported official misconduct, a government agency withholds information to which the public is entitled:

    1. mail the details to Public Malfeasance - HELPcom.NET, P.O. Box 65002, Virginia Beach, Va 23467-5002;
    2. email the details to newsservice@helpcom.net;
About your Editor and History:

Your editor has been a historian for over 55 years and a forensic accountant for over 36 years.

Most of what we know of history is very limited and from the vantage point of the social male economically elite and the clergy of the period. This is because they were the part of society they were taught to read and write. This provides us with little evidence of how the majority of society saw the world.

What we see in today's reflection of history and in the history of the past is not  a recording of events that is not colored by the blind of the politically motivated.  What we see is the politically motivated historian. As E. H. Carr. In What Is History? (1961) points out that the historian is likely to only write about subjects he/she cares about. In the words of another historian, W. H. B. Court: "History free of all values cannot be written. Indeed, it is a concept almost impossible to understand, for men will scarcely take the trouble to inquire laboriously into something which they set no value upon."

Carr also says of of historians that the historian starts off with a theory that needs to be tested by the evidence. The theory will reflect the political views of the historian. Carr makes the important point about the nature of the facts that the historian uses: "The facts are really not at all like fish on the fishmonger's slab. They are like fish swimming about in a vast and sometimes inaccessible ocean; and what the historian catches will depend, partly on chance, but mainly on what part of the ocean he chooses to fish in and what tackle he chooses to use – these two factors being, of course, determined by the kind of fish he wants to catch. By and large, the historian will get the kind of facts he wants. History means interpretation."

When you read a news article or see the nightly news reports you should do so by asking yourself some serious questions. When the commentator/historian do his research on his piece  was he being totally objective? Was he testing a theory that was highly subjective? Was he only looking for "facts" to support his theory and rejecting evidence that suggested other interpretations? As a historian you attempt to act in a completely objective way, but is it really achievable?

HCN
takes news stories as they are, post them unchanged and asks questions that that HCN feels you should ask ands all the while point out where the reporter has rejected evidence that suggests other interpretations or not being totally objective.

Please feel free to pass along and insight you may have on any of our posts:

To Comment read over and agree to abide by  
HCN's Posting Guidelines which are found at:

By a Mouse Over of the Guidelines IMAGE and clicking the IMAGE




Become a HNC Commentator

HCN Commentators come from all walks of life brining original content that entertains, informs, and inspires HNC’s readers. They are credible, passionate and influential because of their knowledge of a specific topics. Join their ranks. 

 

To Request to become a HNC Commentator

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online


Speak out at the ballot box

If Congress felt that its members were going to be former members, all ~ via the ballot box ~ they would act to impeach the BAM. Since there is no threat of that happening, BAM  Sharia law, Marxism and Socialist agendas go on. It is just that simple, speak out at the ballot box.

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online

Competition Realty Business Brokers

Business Brokers Virginia Norfolk Virginia Beach Chesapeake

Competition Realty

Business Brokers

Virginia Beach * Norfolk * Chesapeake 

Business Brokerage Services

We make buying and selling businesses as efficient and easy as possible.

Sell your business confidentially and professional through David Lindsey, Principal Broker with Competition Realty

David M. Lindsey, Principal Broker

Competition Realty

Business Brokers

broker@realtycom.net

www.realtycom.net

Competition Realty, LLC | 5368 Providence Road | Virginia Beach,  Virginia 23464 | 757.424.5102

 

 

 

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online

HelpCom's Impact

Editor's note: HCN’s columns may include satire and parody based on current events, and thus mix fact with fiction. HCN assumes informed readers will be able to tell which is which.

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online

Cash For Real Estate

Cash for Real Estate

Cash for Real Estate



We have Clients Who
Have Cash and Want to Buy
Your Real Estate
Call Us Now To See If
Your Property Qualifies

757 - 424 - 5102
Competition Realty


CNN TOP STORIES

·Why Common Core tests fail kids
·N. Korea nuke threat aimed at U.S.?
·De Niro goofs while making Vine
·Maine couple attacked by moose
·About that 'Game of Thrones' scene
·The world's 33 hottest new hotels are ...
·Doctor: Phoenix VA managers tried to hide long waits
·Veterans dying because of delays
·VA spokesman responds to report
·Kim Jong Un's secretive childhood

read more...

Philly Inquirer

·Embattled Ethics Commission Confirms Samson Probe Underway
·DA: 46 charged in slip-and-fall scam ring
·Questions in police shooting of pizza delivery driver
·Main Line doctor, daughter arrested for growing pot
·Chesco teacher resigns after porn charges lodged
·Hit man gets 30-60 years in death of SEPTA driver

read more...

Virginian-Pilot Headline News

·Syrian activists accuse Assad of new gas attacks
·Amid Russia warning, Ukraine is in a security bind
·10 Things to Know for Thursday
·FCC to propose pay-for-priority Internet standards
·SKorea ferry toll hits 159 as relatives wait
·Obama offering Japan security, economic assurances
·Witness: Iraqi teens posed no threat before death
·Gun carry rights expanded in Ga. under new law
·Costa Rica is demanding US explain 'Cuban Twitter'
·Gacy probe helps solve unrelated Chicago-area case

read more...

LA Times

·Consultant lays out options for $2-billion L.A. County jail overhaul
·Ex-deputies charged in planted-guns case
·Ducks can't hold back surging Stars in 4-2 loss
·Mavericks even series with Spurs with 113-92 victory in Game 2
·Seattle to play host to Green Bay in NFL opener
·California judge named head of state's political ethics agency
·Angels give up four runs in ninth inning in 5-4 loss to Nationals
·Officer in Albuquerque killing figured in 2011 shooting
·U.S. Senate race in Hawaii pits opposing wings of Democratic Party
·FCC chairman proposes new net neutrality rules

read more...

Does Georgia Law say if you don't take a test you are trespassing
The Junk Yard Dog

Marietta, Georgia

 

Worst Place in America to Live?

Hitler Lives!!!!!

Where in Georgia or U.S. Law

Does it say if you don't take a test you are trespassing

but the city’s school system told them their children would be trespassing if they came to school and didn’t take the exam.+

+

Tracy and Mary Finney stand in the backyard of their Marietta home with their children, Ian, 15, a freshman at Marietta High School; Jack, 9, and Macy, 11, both students at Westside Elementary School. Tracy and Mary Finney say they do not want Jack and Macy taking the CRCT, a standardized test given in Georgia, but the city’s school system told them their children would be trespassing if they came to school and didn’t take the exam. Staff/Jeff Stanton

Tracy and Mary Finney stand in the backyard of their Marietta home with their children, Ian, 15, a freshman at Marietta High School; Jack, 9, and Macy, 11, both students at Westside Elementary School. Tracy and Mary Finney say they do not want Jack and Macy taking the CRCT, a standardized test given in Georgia, but the city’s school system told them their children would be trespassing if they came to school and didn’t take the exam

 

MARIETTA — The parents of two West Side Elementary students say they do not want their children taking the CRCT, a standardized test given in Georgia, but the city’s school system told them their children would be trespassing if they came to school and didn’t take the exam.

Mary and Tracy Finney have lived in Marietta for 16 years. They have a third-grader and a fifth-grader at West Side Elementary, along with a ninth-grader at Marietta High School, and say they love the school system. But the Finneys are opposed to standardized testing, worried about data being collected on children as well as the stress they say is caused by the over-testing of students.

“You have to have testing at some point, but there’s so much standardized 

testing now,” she said. “It’s for the higher-ups, the bureaucrats, not the educators. They are over-testing our children. I’ve always thought that. We said we don’t want to do this much (testing). That was our incentive to refuse taking the CRCT.”

The test is given across Georgia. It began Wednesday and runs through next Tuesday. The Finneys say the school system is violating their 14th Amendment rights in trying to force their kids to take the CRCT and they plan to either send their children to private school or home school them next year.

Origins of the problem

Standardized testing has become a hot political issue across the nation. The Georgia Legislature nearly pulled the state out of Common Core — a collaboration of 45 states establishing national standards for what should be learned in each grade — earlier this year, before the effort died at the last minute.

Some have concerns about private companies that could make millions in profits from Common Core, while others worry about the amounts of data being collected on students nationwide though standardized tests. The Finneys appear to be in the second group.

“They are collecting data on our children,” Mary Finney said. “Now, with Common Core there is such a large amount of information and data collected on children. People don’t realize it. We don’t want to sound like we’re wearing tin-foil hats, but they want to track our kids from kindergarten through college.”

When they told West Side Principal Karen Smits that their children wouldn’t be taking the CRCT, her response alarmed them.

“To my knowledge, there is not an opt-out option for the CRCT since these tests are mandated by state law,” she wrote in an email. “I have forwarded your email to our Superintendent, Dr. Lembeck, and Associate Superintendent Dayton Hibbs for further guidance. Someone will be in touch soon.”

That email did not set well with the Finneys. 

“With all due respect, we never requested to opt out,” Tracey Finney wrote in response. “We are REFUSING the CRCTs.”

Another issue is a long-planned field trip to Blue Ridge. The Finneys’ fifth-grader has already paid to go on the trip, but it falls during CRCT make-up days. They are afraid their child won’t be able to go on the trip if the test isn’t taken. 

Meeting with administrators goes sour

Things didn’t improve from there. The Finneys worked out a meeting with school administrators early Wednesday morning to talk things over. But when they arrived, they were confronted by a police officer instead of the principal. 

According to Tracey Finney, the officer was extremely nice and professional, but told them being on school property while actively opposed to the test was “kind of a trespassing thing” and that their kids weren’t allowed on the property either if they weren’t going to take the test. The officer’s report confirms the parents were told they and their students would be trespassing if they stayed on the property.

The family then worked out a deal to take their kids to school at 11:30, after testing was over, but another email from the West Side principal stopped them in their tracks.

“It is my understanding that you plan to bring the children to school this afternoon,” Smits wrote. “Please be aware that CRCT make-up testing will begin today for any children who miss testing this morning and arrive in the afternoon.”

It appears there had been a misunderstanding about the meeting. 

Smits emailed the Finneys at 6:40 p.m., notifying them of her willingness to meet with them in the morning. But another email, sent more than two hours later by Associate Superintendent Dayton Hibbs, at 9:04 p.m., canceled the meeting set by Smits. 

Superintendent Emily Lembeck said the family probably saw the email.

“Most people are tied to their phones,” she said. “They didn’t say to the officer they hadn’t seen anything.”

But the Finneys said they did not see the later email sent after 9 p.m., and it was never mentioned when they showed up at the school the next morning.

“I didn’t discover that email until a few hours ago. I was awake but figured no one was going to respond after 6 p.m.,” said Mary Finney of the email sent to her husband’s account. “Nothing was mentioned about it during the meeting.”

School board chair, superintendent weigh in

Randy Weiner is the school board chairman at Marietta City Schools and his district includes West Side Elementary. Personally, he said he wouldn’t pull his students out of the test, adding he hasn’t heard of any parent doing so in his eight years on the school board.

“Generally speaking, if it were my kids who simply were stressed out about taking the CRCT, I would tell them to get with the program and that they would be taking the CRCT today,” he said.

But he assured Marietta schools will not force any kids to take the test if they don’t want to.

“Since there is no opt-out provision in the law, the principals feel there is no choice,” he said. “That’s why the Finneys feel they were being forced to take the CRCT. We would not force a child to take the test. We’ll use common sense.”

Marietta schools attorney Clem Doyle confirmed there is no opt-out provision in the law. Weiner said that’s a product of lawmakers not anticipating anyone would want to opt out.

“They didn’t anticipate parents demanding their child not take the test, I’m sure,” he said. 

But while Lembeck stressed she hopes the problem can be resolved, she did not say for sure if the Finney children will have to take the test or not. 

“The Georgia statutes are strongly worded stating all third- and fifth- graders shall be tested,” she said. “The law provides no guidelines for parents who might want to opt out. The district is working with the state Department of Education to seek guidance regarding balancing our obligations under state law and the state Department of Education’s rules regarding the ability to accommodate these sort of parental requests.”

She also said she couldn’t guarantee the children would be allowed to go on next week’s field trip during CRCT makeup days, saying she hasn’t met with the DOE, school leadership and the parents yet to come to a resolution. 

This is the first time parents in a Marietta school have told the district they don’t want their kids to take the test, according to Lembeck, though it has happened elsewhere. 

Whatever happens in this situation is likely to set a precedent for the future.

“I think we need to make sure the parents are educated as to the reason why we give these assessments,” Lembeck said. “We don’t take them lightly, nor do we want to see parents and students pitted at odds with our schools for a required assessment. But if there is a way to seek resolution, that is what we want to do.”

Read more: The Marietta Daily Journal - Area couple battles elementary school over CRCT testing 

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
Posted by editor on Saturday, April 19 @ 10:24:17 MST (29 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)



A Virginia Beach Maglev? Ya can't fix stupid !!!
The Junk Yard Dog

Roger Chesley Points out

That With the Virginia Beach

City Council

You Can't Fix Stupid !!!!!

Another Virginia Beach

Train Wreck

Another maglev failure to Tidewater !!!!!!!!!
Morris has not repaid a $7 million loan from the state on the ODU project !!!
. . . traveled past Old Dominion University in the last decade and a half?
Morris' speculative maglev project that began in 1999 left ODU with a
3,200-foot elevated track,
Lots of concrete pillars and
A huge embarrassment.
A university spokesman told Roger Friday maglev research is at a standstill.

Roger Chesley

 Wrote:

Virginia Beach should know not to float maglev plans

Here comes Tony Morris, president and CEO of American Maglev Technology, touting an audacious proposal to bring his fledgling transportation system to Virginia Beach.

Instead of choosing to extend light rail from Norfolk, pick his magnetically levitating train! It would work great! A line from Newtown Road to the Oceanfront would cost just $334 million - a third of the price of light rail!

Wait, there's more! He's willing to throw in a 2-1/2-mile maglev test line! If it doesn't get federal certification, no worries: The city wouldn't owe a dime toward the $60 million price tag!

The problem isn't that this master showman has a good pitch.

It's that some Virginia Beach officials think he might deliver, even though no public maglev system operates in the United States.

It's as if Beach leaders slept through the past 15 years, a period when Morris has been associated with failed projects, unfulfilled boasts, and millions of dollars spent with little to show for it.

Aren't they aware Beach officials, in the late 1990s, turned down Morris' proposed maglev route near the Oceanfront and declined to give any public money to that venture?

Or that, a decade ago, the top maglev scientist for the Federal Railroad Administration, John Harding, said Morris "exaggerates what he's accomplished."

Better yet, haven't they traveled past Old Dominion University in the last decade and a half? Morris' speculative maglev project that began in 1999 left ODU with a 3,200-foot elevated track, lots of concrete pillars and a huge embarrassment. A university spokesman told me Friday maglev research is at a standstill.

Nor has Morris repaid a $7 million loan from the state on the ODU project.

So I'm dumbfounded the Beach would give Morris the time of day. Yet some officials seem mesmerized by his latest pitch.

Morris has teamed up with ACS Industrial Services, a $53 billion engineering and construction company. Several Beach officials have journeyed to the Atlanta area to ride on Morris' half-mile test track.

"It's pretty impressive," Councilwoman Rosemary Wilson said. "It was smooth, quiet and cheap to operate."

Vice Mayor Louis Jones also called the maglev ride smooth, but he noted the track had no turns or inclines - things you normally encounter in the real world.

Still, Jones said, "If maglev is... functional, and the price a community would have to pay to install it and put it in as a system is significantly less... then why wouldn't we look at it, at least?"

When I reached Morris briefly on Thursday, he defended his past failures. "You think about what's happened in technology in 15 years, what's happened in your life in 15 years," he said. "The proof is in what we're offering."

Well, why should Virginia Beach be America's guinea pig?

Morris countered that commercial maglev operates in Shanghai, China, and in Japan.

True, the high-speed maglev in Shanghai began running about a decade ago. But it cost billions of dollars to develop and more than $1 billion to build.

Besides, the state's transportation secretary has offered Virginia Beach $155 million for light rail - but no money at all for maglev. Aubrey Layne told me federal officials haven't approved the maglev technology.

The money the state is dangling in front of the Beach could easily go to other light-rail projects in Northern Virginia, Layne added.

Many city officials see that as a threat, one that limits their options.

It is.

"Would I use my own money on maglev? The answer is no," Layne said. "So I can't use taxpayers' money, either."

It's hard to disagree.

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
Posted by editor on Saturday, April 19 @ 07:23:58 MST (29 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)



Another Spore Train Wreck
The Junk Yard Dog

John Moss

SAYS:

If you want to see further evidence of sophomoric analysis in defense of a 8.1 percent increase in the car tax read the latest answers to council's budget questions.

Jim Spore

Virginia Beach City Manager

The Spore Train Wreck

Unfortunately council suffers from a total lack of fiscal discipline being exercised by the City Manager.

Median family income is down 4.6 percent and Mr. Spore cannot make ends meet after a 3.5% increase in real estate tax assessments without increasing the personal property tax rate by 8.1 percent.

You don't have to pay over $250,000 to get a budget of this poor intellectual rigor in terms of tradeoff decision-making.

Council would get a better budget recommendation from by randomly selecting five households that are making do with 4.6 percent less income.

They know how to set priorities and make tough decisions something the City Manager is not capable of doing.

Beach residents deserve better than this budget. More to follow.

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
Posted by editor on Saturday, April 19 @ 04:25:37 MST (29 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)



The mentally ill are running our schools?????
The Junk Yard Dog

 

TheBlaze

Texas Parents Hit Back After Their Kids Come Home With ‘Very Inappropriate’ Assignment — and Why It May Look Familiar

 

Parents in El Paso, Texas, want answers after fourth-grade students at Pasodale Elementary School were reportedly given an adult-themed assignment on topics like infidelity and a mother losing her son to war.

The “inappropriate reading assignment,” obtained by KTSM-TV, asks students to draw inferences based on the information provided.

The news station provides a transcript of the questions included in the assignment:

- Ruby sat on the bed she shared with her husband holding a hairclip. There was something mysterious and powerful about the cheaply manufactured neon clip that she was fondling suspiciously. She didn’t recognize the hairclip. It was too big to be their daughter’s, and Ruby was sure that it wasn’t hers. She hadn’t had friends over in weeks but there was this hairclip, little and green with a few long black hair strands caught in it. Ruby ran her fingers through her own blonde hair. She had just been vacuuming when she noticed this small, bright green object under the bed. Now their life would never be the same. She would wait here until Mike returned home.

1. Why is Ruby so affected by the hairclip?

2. How has the hairclip affected Ruby’s relationship?

KTSM-TV

KTSM-TV

- “Tommy!” Mom called out as she walked in the front door. “Tommy,” she continued shouting, “I sure could use some help with these groceries. There was still no reply. Mom walked into the kitchen to put the grocery bags down on the counter when she noticed shattered glass from the picture window all over the living room floor and a baseball not far from there. “I’m going to kill you, Tommy!” Mom yelled to herself as she realized that Tommy’s shoes were gone.

1. What happened to the window?

2. Why did Tommy leave?

KTSM-TV

KTSM-TV

- Valerie opened up the letter from the military department. She felt the pit of her stomach drop to the bottom of the earth before she even opened it. She knew it was news about John. As she read the first line, she thought of all of the lunches she had packed him and all the nights she tucked him in his bed and warded off the nighttime monsters. The man carrying the flag put his hand on her shoulder. She thought of the day that John signed up for the military. Her tears wet the letter. She stopped reading after the first line.

1. What does the letter say?

2. What is Valerie’s relationship to John?

KTSM-TV

KTSM-TV

Ursula Silverstein, an upset parent of a 10-year-old daughter, said these types of “life situations” should be “taught at home, not at school.”

“Why would the teacher give them that type of assignment, you know? It could be something about nature or planets. But something about that, it’s very inappropriate,” another parent told KTSM-TV.

However, some people seemingly downplayed the inappropriateness of the assignment on Facebook.

The Ysleta Independent School District released a statement on Thursday, calling the assignment “unacceptable” and apologizing to parents.

“YISD administration is aware of an unacceptable assignment that was given to a 4th- grade class at Pasodale Elementary. We apologize to the students and the parents who received this assignment,” the statement said. “Campus administration has addressed the issue with the teacher, and has taken decisive measures to assure that future assignments are aligned to the curriculum and are of the highest instructional caliber.”

The assignment may look familiar to some readers of TheBlaze as a similar assignment was reportedly given to fourth-graders at Playa Del Ray Elementary School in Arizona.

“A 4th grade student at the Playa Del Rey Elementary School in Arizona said she was ‘a little shocked’ when she opened up her homework assignment last week,” TheBlaze reported. “Not quite the reading material the 10-year-old was probably used to, the worksheet asked her to explain what was happening in a situation where a woman finds another woman’s hair clip under the bed.”

That was the only scenario described by the parent in that instance.

A school representative told TheBlaze at the time that the teacher responsible “downloaded a worksheet.” While it’s not entirely certain the worksheets are the same, it could indicate that the adult-themed worksheet is more widely-used than first thought.

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
Posted by editor on Friday, April 18 @ 14:36:50 MST (34 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)



Obama Helps Serbia become anti-Jew in digitial !!!!
Europe

Look Where America's affirmative action President is sending our money now !!!!!
To the Anti-Jew Nation of Serbia !!!!

Now they can be anti-Jew in digital !!!

DIGITAL SWITCHOVER (DSO) PROJECT - PROCUREMENT STRATEGY CONSULTANT

Procurement ref:
Country: Serbia
Sector: Information and Communication Technologies
Project number:
Funding sources: EBRD - Slovak Republic TC Fund
Contract type: Consultancy Services
Notice type: Invitation for expressions of interest (CSU)
Issue date: 17 Apr 2014
Closing date: 8 May 2014
14:00 local time in Belgrade

Assignment Description: The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD or the Bank) is considering up to EUR 31 million, sovereign guaranteed loan to a public company JP Emisiona Tehnika i Veze (ETV) for the purpose of financing the second phase of the switchover from analogue to digital TV and radio broadcasting in Serbia (DSO or the Project).

ETV is a public company incorporated in October 2009 for the purpose of implementing DSO and managing the national TV broadcasting infrastructure in Serbia. ETV has been set up to ensure equal quality of and access to the new digital network to all broadcasters, either public or private. The Project is implemented by ETV jointly with the Ministry of Trade and Telecommunications (MoTT) and supported by other stakeholders such as RATEL, the telecom regulator. The deadline for finalizing DSO in Europe is 17 June 2015 as set by the Regional Radio Communication Conference held in June 2006 in Geneva.

The Project will require procurement of the following goods, works and services: 

  • Equipment - To build the network of three multiplex digital  TV platforms (MUX) for digital terrestrial TV broadcasting, to cover at least 95% of the population of Serbia with the first MUX and at least 90% population with the second and third MUXs. Equipment will include network equipment, transmission equipment, high-powered and low-powered antenna systems, measurement equipment, uninterruptable power supply and power generators;
  • Civil Works – Infrastructure rehabilitation and reconstruction works for the purposes of housing the above equipment; and,
  • Consulting Services – A consulting firm will be required to assist ETV with the contract management and supervision of the implementation phase.

The Executing Agency wishes to engage an experienced consultant (the Consultant) to assist with implementation of the Project by undertaking the following tasks:

Task 1: The Consultant shall assist in the preparation of an optimum procurement and contracting strategy for the Project along with an overall project procurement plan which will describe the procurement process in detail, and set out a schedule for implementation.

Task 2: The Consultant shall review all technical specifications and technical documentation prepared by ETV ensuring that the documentation has been prepared in accordance with best practice and international standards. If appropriate, the Consultant shall suggest modifications/amendments to the operational and technical requirements for ETV’s consideration

 Task 3: The Consultant shall assist with the prequalification of contractors and the preparation of all associated documents in the Bank’s standard format. This would include the preparation of prequalification documents, evaluation of prequalification applications and preparation of a prequalification application evaluation report.

Task 4: The Consultant shall advise on the Standard Tender Documents and associated internationally accepted forms of contract to be adopted for use under the Project and shall assist in the preparation of tender documents with particular emphasis on the preparation and development of appropriate qualification and tender evaluation criteria.

Task 5: The Consultant shall assist in the organisation and administration of the tender process for each contract. It is currently envisaged that the Project implementation will require 5 tender processes, namely two tenders for goods, further two tenders for consulting services and one tender for civil works.

Task 6: The Consultant shall assist ETV with drafting the Terms of Reference and selection of a loan-financed consulting firm to assist ETV with the contract management and implementation phase following contracts’ signing.

Assignment Start Date and Duration: It is currently envisaged that the assignment will commence in July 2014 and will have duration of approximately 6 months.

Cost Estimate: EUR 265,000.00; Exclusive of VAT.

Client Contracting: The Consultant must determine whether any indirect taxes/VAT are chargeable on the proposed services and state the basis for such. If any indirect taxes/VAT are payable, the Client will have to pay indirect taxes/VAT element to the services directly to the Consultant unless otherwise agreed.

Funding Source:  EBRD - Slovak Republic TC Fund

Eligibility: Consultancy firms shall be registered in the Slovak Republic and the individual experts proposed must be citizens or permanent residents of the Slovak Republic.  However, up to a maximum of 25% of the maximum contract amount may be used to finance services of local experts who are nationals of the Republic of Serbia or consultancy firms of the Republic of Serbia.

Executing Agency/Client:  JP Tehnika Emisiona i Veze

Consultant Profile:  Corporate services are required. The Consultant will be a firm or a group of firms with extensive experience in the sector and able to demonstrate the following:  

- Experience of delivering procurement assistance in projects of similar complexity (at least one project in the past 5 years);
- Experience in projects with procurement rules and policies of Multilateral Development Banks - MDBs (at least one project in the past 5 years);
- Familiarity with the Digital Switchover process and related civil works will be considered an advantage;

It is envisaged that the Consultant’s team will include the following key experts:

-  Project Manager (at least 5 year of experience; at least 3 projects as a leading project manager; PMP or similar certificate will be considered an advantage);
- IFI Procurement and Contract Specialist (with experience of at least one project in the past 5 years where Multilateral Development Banks’ (MDBs) procurement rules and policies were applied);
- Broadcasting engineer – at least 5 years of experience in installation, dressing and planning of the transmitters and gep fillers; 10 years of general engineering experience; at least one project in digitalisation will be considered an advantage.
- Broadcasting engineer – at least 5 years of experience in installation, dressing and planning head-end facility; at least 10 years of general engineering experience; at least one project in digitalisation will be considered an advantage.
- Civil/Construction engineer - at least 5 years of experience in designing, planning and implementation controlling of antenna towers; at least 10 years of general engineering experience; at least one project in similar area will be considered an advantage.

The core team will be supported by other non-key experts, as deemed necessary by the Consultant, in order to ensure successful implementation of the Project.

Status: Interested firms are hereby invited to submit expressions of interest. In order to determine the capability and experience of consulting firms seeking to be shortlisted, the information submitted should include the following:

  • company profile, organisation and staffing;
  • details of experience or similar assignments undertaken in the previous seven years, including their locations;
  • CVs of staff who could be available to work on the assignment.

One original and two copies of the expression of interest, in English, shall be submitted to the Client in an envelope marked "EXPESSION OF INTEREST for "Digital Switchover (DSO) Project - Procurement Strategy Consultant”, to reach the Client not later than the closing day/time. One copy in English should also be submitted by email to the Client as a maximum of two electronic file attachments not exceeding 4MB in total.

One further copy in English should be submitted by email to the EBRD's contact person by the same due date as a maximum oftwo electronic file attachments not exceeding 4MB in total. 

The Expression of Interest must be accompanied by a completed Declaration and Contact Sheet, the template for which is available from the following web-link:  http://www.ebrd.com/pages/workingwithus/procurement/notices/csu/contact_sheet.doc

Note: Selection and contracting will normally be made from responses to this notification however, the highest-ranked consultant may be required to prepare a brief proposal.  The Consultant will be selected from a shortlist, subject to availability of funding.

 

 

CONTACTS

The Executing Agency/Client Contact Person:
Dejan Smigic 
Acting General Manager
JP Tehnika Emisiona i Veze
Jоvаnа Ristićа 1
11030 Belgrade, Serbia
Tel: +381 11 369 32 51, Fax: +381 11 369 32 60
e-mail: dejan.smigic@etv.rs

EBRD Contact:
Yvonne Wilkinson
Principal Advisor, Technical Cooperation
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
One Exchange Square
London EC2A 2JN
Tel: + 44 20 7338 7123, Fax: +44 20 7338 7451
e-mail: wilkinsy@ebrd.com

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
Posted by editor on Friday, April 18 @ 14:27:24 MST (20 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)



Privacy and WhatsApp
Internet Trolls?

Having trouble viewing this email? View it online.     

April 2014

Privacy and WhatsApp

Privacy and WhatsApp

In light of Facebook’s proposed acquisition of WhatsApp, FTC staff has notified the companies about their obligations to protect the privacy of their users. The letter notes that they must get permission from WhatsApp subscribers before making any material changes to how they use data already collected from them. They also must not misrepresent the extent to which they maintain the privacy of subscribers’ information. In 2011, Facebook settled FTC charges that it deceived its users by failing to keep its privacy promises.

App-rehensive

App security

 

Two companies have agreed to settle FTC charges that they misrepresented the security of their mobile apps and put the sensitive personal information of millions of people at risk. The FTC alleged that, despite their security promises, Fandango and Credit Karma failed to take reasonable steps to secure their mobile apps, leaving people’s sensitive personal information vulnerable to attackers who could intercept any of the information the apps sent or received. This type of attack is especially dangerous on public Wi-Fi networks like those at coffee shops, airports and shopping centers.

Getting jerked around

FTC files complaint against Jerk.com

 

The FTC charged the operators of the website "Jerk.com" with harvesting personal information from Facebook to create profiles for more than 73 million people, including children, that labeled people a “Jerk” or “not a Jerk.” According to the FTC’s complaint, Jerk, LLC and its operator, John Fanning, violated federal law by misrepresenting that users created all the content on the site and by falsely claiming that people could change their online profiles for a $30 fee. Jerk.com profiles allegedly often appeared in search engine results.

Alarming calls

Home security company used illegal telemarketing practices

 

The FTC has settled a complaint against a home security company that illegally called millions of people on the National Do Not Call Registry to pitch home security systems. According to the FTC, Versatile Marketing Solutions bought phone numbers from lead generators who claimed those consumers had given Versatile permission to contact them. They hadn’t. The lead generators used illegal ways – robocalls, fake surveys and calls to phone numbers on the Registry – to compile their lists.

Up in your grill

Propane suppliers charged with collusion

 

The FTC charged two leading suppliers of propane exchange tanks used in BBQ grills and patio heaters with illegally working together to reduce the amount of propane in each container. The FTC’s administrative complaint alleges Blue Rhino and AmeriGas colluded to reduce the propane level in each tank from 17 to 15 pounds, without lowering the wholesale price paid by Walmart. According to the FTC, Blue Rhino and AmeriGas secretly agreed that neither would deviate from their proposal to Walmart to reduce the fill level. Walmart eventually accepted the tanks with less propane. The case is headed to administrative litigation.

A good year

FTC 2013 Annual Highlights

 

The FTC has released its 2013 Annual Highlights, describing the agency’s work to protect consumers and promote competition during the past calendar year. In celebration of its 100th anniversary, the FTC will host a public symposium on Nov. 7 in Washington that will feature keynote addresses and panel discussions examining both the Commission’s history and its future.

Business flop-portunity

False Business Opportunties

 

The operators of a business opportunity scheme have agreed to settle FTC charges that they defrauded people who bought their work-at-home program. Under the settlement, Ben and Dave’s Consulting Associates, Inc., and David Clabeaux, the defendants behind The Online Entrepreneur, are banned from selling business and work-at-home opportunities. Their scheme purportedly would help buyers set up their own websites. The scammers promised buyers that they could earn a significant income in commissions by marketing their sites as affiliates of well-known companies like Prada, Sony, Louis Vuitton and Verizon.

                                

"Consumers are increasingly using mobile apps for sensitive transactions. Our cases against Fandango and Credit Karma should remind app developers of the need to make data security central to how they design their apps."

— Edith Ramirez, FTC Chairwoman

Alcohol marketing

For the first time, the FTC has obtained substantial information about internet and digital marketing in the alcohol industry. According to the FTC’s fourth major study on the industry, online and digital promotional expenditures showed a four-fold increase since the 2008 report. The current report compiles data about the industry’s compliance with self-regulatory guidelines, including ad placement, digital marketing, and the role of self-regulation.

Auto know better

Courtesy Auto Group of Massachusetts has agreed to settle the FTC’s charges that the dealership deceptively advertised that drivers could lease a vehicle for $0 down and specific monthly payments when the advertised amounts actually excluded substantial fees. In another case, the FTC filed a complaint against Arkansas car dealer Abernathy Motor Company and its two principals charging that they violated federal law by failing to display a “Buyers Guide” on used vehicles offered for sale.

Banned from debt collection

 

Under a settlement with the FTC, Jason R. Begley and Wayne W. Lunsford, the two principal owners of Rincon Debt Management, will give up more than $3.3 million in assets for victim refunds. The order permanently bans the two defendants from the debt collection business. Litigation continues against several companies that Begley and Lunsford used as part of their scheme.

Telemarketing fraud

 

At the FTC’s request, a federal court has temporarily stopped a multi-million dollar telemarketing fraud that targeted older people. According to the FTC, Ari Tietolman, the leader of the telemarketing scheme, and his associates called tens of thousands of older people claiming to sell fraud protection, legal protection and pharmaceutical benefit services.

    IN OTHER NEWS:

                More >
 

    SHARE THIS:

 

   

Federal Trade Commission  |  600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW  |  Washington DC 20580

Need help with your email subscription? 800-439-1420 or email us

Need help with a consumer issue?   877-FTC-HELP


This email was sent to forensic.editor@helpcom.net using GovDelivery, on behalf of: Federal Trade Commission · 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW · Washington, DC 20580 · 1-877-382-4357
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
Posted by editor on Friday, April 18 @ 14:13:36 MST (23 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)



Dumb Ass Public School admin & Rules For Bullies
The Junk Yard Dog

TheBlaze

Nebraska School’s ‘Ludicrous’ Advice for Bullying Victims Sparks Parent Outrage — Read the 9 Rules Here

Fifth grade students at Zeman Elementary School in Lincoln, Neb., were recently sent home with a “flyer” outlining how they should handle bullies. The instructions were apparently deemed so ridiculous by parents that the school district quickly issued an apology and the “inaccurate information” was pulled.

That was after the nine “rules” for dealing with bullies went viral, of course.

Here are some of the more questionable ones:

• Rule #3 Do not be afraid.
• Rule #4: Do not verbally defend yourself.
• Rule #7: Do not tell on bullies.
• Rule #8: Don’t be a sore loser
• Rule #9: Learn to laugh at yourself and not get “hooked” by put-downs.

You can read the full list, along with their descriptions in the photo below:

Screengrab via Jezebel/Facebook

Screengrab via Jezebel/Facebook

After seeing parents’ reaction to the flyer, Lincoln Public Schools issued an apology on its Facebook page.

 

As noted in the embedded Facebook post above, the school linked to another worksheet on bullying, which includes tips like “contact a school staff member” and “do not minimize or make excuses for bullying behaviors.”

Many Facebook users were still not completely satisfied after the apology.

“That list of 9 rules for dealing with bullies was hands down the worst advice any person could give to another,” one user wrote. “That it was an ‘educator’ giving it to elementary age children is just beyond the pale. ‘Don’t tell on bullies… would we keep our friends if we tattled on them?’ – Seriously?!”

“Sorry. This is not a learning opportunity. This is a show of complete incompetence. 1970 called, they want their flier back,” another commented.

Others wanted an explanation as to why the “ludicrous” flyer even made it home in the first place.

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
Posted by editor on Friday, April 18 @ 14:06:30 MST (16 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)



Stop Virginia's Zoning Abuse - Attend Pitchfork Rally!!!
The Junk Yard Dog

Abuse of Power In York County

Rezoning  to Avoid New Laws: SB51 and HB1089

Please join us!

MAY 14 SAVE THE DATE!!! rally  Pitch Fork Protest in York County

Pitchfork Rally as York County Rezoning Threatens Farm Freedom

http://virginiafreecitizen.com/2014/04/10/pitchfork-rally-york-county-rezoning-threatens-farm-freedom

Farm freedom advocates plan to hold a pitchfork rally in front of York Hall starting at 6pm.

The planning commission meeting starts at 7pm. at York Hall.  Farm freedom supporters have created this webpage. 7,685 properties may be impacted by this proposal.

     MAY 14 SAVE THE DATE!!!  Pitch Fork Protest in York County!!!

     Have your voice heard!!! Public hearing after the rally!

SIGN THE PETITION!!!!  Click here

 

 

 

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
Posted by editor on Friday, April 18 @ 09:04:49 MST (19 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)



FRIVOLOUS TAX ARGUMENTS IN GENERAL
The Junk Yard Dog

 

 

 

FRIVOLOUS TAX ARGUMENTS IN GENERAL

 

Contents

 

A. The Voluntary Nature of the Federal Income Tax System

  1. Contention:  The filing of a tax return is voluntary
  2. Contention:  Payment of federal income tax is voluntary
  3. Contention:  Taxpayers can reduce their federal income tax liability by filing a “zero return”
  4. Contention:  The IRS must prepare federal tax returns for a person who fails to file
  5. Contention:  Compliance with an administrative summons issued by the IRS is voluntary

 

B. The Meaning of Income:  Taxable Income and Gross Income

  1. Contention:  Wages, tips, and other compensation received for personal services are not income
  2. Contention:  Only foreign-source income is taxable
  3. Contention:  Federal Reserve Notes are not income
  4. Contention:  Military retirement pay does not constitute income

 

C. The Meaning of Certain Terms Used in the Internal Revenue Code

  1. Contention:  Taxpayer is not a “citizen” of the United States, and thus is not subject to the federal income tax laws
  2. Contention:  The “United States” consists only of the District of Columbia, federal territories, and federal enclaves
  3. Contention:  Taxpayer is not a “person” as defined by the Internal Revenue Code, thus is not subject to the federal income tax laws
  4. Contention:  The only “employees” subject to federal income tax are employees of the federal government

 


A.   The Voluntary Nature of the Federal Income Tax System

1.    Contention:  The filing of a tax return is voluntary.

Some taxpayers assert that they are not required to file federal tax returns because the filing of a tax return is voluntary.  Proponents of this contention point to the fact that the IRS tells taxpayers in the Form 1040 instruction book that the tax system is voluntary.  Additionally, these taxpayers frequently quote Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145, 176 (1960), for the proposition that "[o]ur system of taxation is based upon voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint."

 

The Law:  The word “voluntary,” as used in Flora and in IRS publications, refers to our system of allowing taxpayers initially to determine the correct amount of tax and complete the appropriate returns, rather than have the government determine tax for them from the outset.  The requirement to file an income tax return is not voluntary and is clearly set forth in sections 6011(a), 6012(a), et seq., and 6072(a) of the Internal Revenue Code.  See also Treas. Reg. § 1.6011-1(a).

 

Any taxpayer who has received more than a statutorily determined amount of gross income in a given tax year is obligated to file a return for that tax year.  Failure to file a tax return could subject the non-compliant individual to civil and/or criminal penalties, including fines and imprisonment.  InUnited States v. Tedder, 787 F.2d 540, 542 (10th Cir. 1986), the court stated that, “although Treasury regulations establish voluntary compliance as the general method of income tax collection, Congress gave the Secretary of the Treasury the power to enforce the income tax laws through involuntary collection . . . .  The IRS’ efforts to obtain compliance with the tax laws are entirely proper.”  The IRS warned taxpayers of the consequences of making this frivolous argument in Rev. Rul. 2007-20, 2007-1 C.B. 863.

 

Relevant Case Law:

 

Helvering v. Mitchell, 303 U.S. 391, 399 (1938) – the Supreme Court stated that “[i]n assessing income taxes, the Government relies primarily upon the disclosure by the taxpayer of the relevant facts . . . in his annual return.  To ensure full and honest disclosure, to discourage fraudulent attempts to evade the tax, Congress imposes [either criminal or civil] sanctions.”

 

United States v. Gerads, 999 F.2d 1255, 1256 (8th Cir. 1993) – the court held that “[a]ny assertion that the payment of income taxes is voluntary is without merit.”

 

United States v. Tedder, 787 F.2d 540, 542 (10th Cir. 1986) – the court upheld a conviction for willfully failing to file a return, stating that the premise “that the tax system is somehow ‘voluntary’ . . . is incorrect.”

 

United States v. Richards, 723 F.2d 646, 648 (8th Cir. 1983) – the court upheld a conviction and fines imposed for willfully failing to file tax returns, stating that the claim that filing a tax return is voluntary “was rejected in United States v. Drefke, 707 F.2d 978, 981 (8th Cir. 1983)."

 

Woods v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 88, 90 (1988) – the court rejected the claim that reporting income taxes is strictly voluntary, referring to it as a “‘tax protester’ type” argument, and found the petitioner liable for the penalty for failure to file a return.

 

Other Cases:

 

United States v. Drefke, 707 F.2d 978, 981 (8th Cir. 1983); United States v. Schulz, 529 F. Supp. 2d 341 (N.D.N.Y. 2007), aff'd, 517 F.3d 606 (2d Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 555 U.S. 946 (2008); Johnson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-312, 78 T.C.M. (CCH) 468, 471 (1999).

 

Posted by editor on Friday, April 18 @ 04:59:27 MST (24 reads)
(Read More... | 130293 bytes more | Score: 0)



JEWS required to register in the Ukraine
Europe

Jews in east Ukraine forced

to register with authorities

Jews in east Ukraine forced to register with authorities

Masked pro-Russian militants have ordered Jews in an eastern Ukraine city to “register” with authorities, a shocking reminder of the darkest days of the World War II Nazi regime.

Jews in the city of Donetsk, where militants have taken over government buildings in a bid to annex the city under Russian rule, said they were handed leaflets ordering them to provide a list of property they own and pay a registration fee “or else have their citizenship revoked, face deportation and see their assets confiscated,” reported Ynet News, Israel’s largest news website.

Modal Trigger

Ukrainians hold up a large national flag during a nationlist and pro-unity rally in Donetsk on Thursday.Photo: Getty Images

The leaflets bore the name of Denis Pushilin, who identified himself as chairman of “Donetsk’s temporary government,” and were distributed near the Donetsk synagogue and other areas, according to the reports.

Modal Trigger

Denis Pushilin speaks at a rally outside the Donetsk region administration building April 9. Pushilin has denied any connection with the flyers.

“ID and passport are required to register your Jewish religion, religious documents of family members, as well as documents establishing the rights to all real estate property that belongs to you, including vehicles. Evasion of registration will result in citizenship revoke and you will be forced outside the country with a confiscation of property,” the leaflet read, according to Ynet News.

Modal Trigger

Ukrainian riot policePhoto: AP

Pushilin acknowledged that flyers were distributed under his organization’s name in Donetsk, but denied any connection to them, Ynet reported in Hebrew.

Modal Trigger

Ukrainian riot policemen after pro-Kiev protesters finished their rally in Donetsk.

 

“We don’t know if these notifications were distributed by pro-Russian activists or someone else, but it’s serious that it exists,” said Olga Reznikova, 32, a Jewish resident of Donetsk. “The text reminds me of the fascists in 1941,” she added, referring to the Nazis who occupied Ukraine during World War II.

Reznikova told Ynet she never experienced anti-Semitism in the city until she saw this leaflet.

The order was quickly condemned by the US.

“In the year 2014, after all of the miles traveled and all of the journey of history, this is not just intolerable,” US Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters. “It’s grotesque. It is beyond unacceptable.”

Michael Salberg, director of international affairs at the New York City-based Anti-Defamation League, said it is unclear if the leaflets were the product of pro-Russian leadership or a splinter group.

Either way, he said, the anti-Semitism is troubling.

“The message is a message to all the people that we’re going to exert our power over you,” he said. “Jews are the default scapegoat throughout history for despots to send a message to the general public: Don’t step out of line.”

* *

Was this in the

US Marxist Propaganda Media Organs;

Cover Obama's ASS Press

Mouse over the US marxist propaganda's logo/image below and click and see for yourself 

New York Times

The Washington Post

L.A. Times

Boston Globe

San Francisco Chronicle

Daily Press

Baltimore Sun

Virginian Pilot

Richmond Times Dispatch

Maybe that is why they are Dying?

Was this on?

CBS

NBC

CNBC

ABC

CNN

FOX

MSNBC

Will it ever be?

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online

Posted by editor on Friday, April 18 @ 04:51:50 MST (495 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)



FRIVOLOUS TAX ARGUMENTS IN GENERAL
The Junk Yard Dog

 

FRIVOLOUS TAX ARGUMENTS IN GENERAL

D. Constitutional Amendment Claims

  1. Contention:  Taxpayers can refuse to pay income taxes on religious or moral grounds by invoking the First Amendment
  2. Contention:  Federal income taxes constitute a “taking” of property without due process of law, violating the Fifth Amendment.
  3. Contention:  Taxpayers do not have to file returns or provide financial information because of the protection against self-incrimination found in the Fifth Amendment
  4. Contention:  Compelled compliance with the federal income tax laws is a form of servitude in violation of the Thirteenth Amendment
  5. Contention:  The federal income tax laws are unconstitutional because the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was not properly ratified
  6. Contention:  The Sixteenth Amendment does not authorize a direct non-apportioned federal income tax on United States citizens

 

E. Fictional Legal Bases

  1. Contention:  The Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the United States
  2. Contention:  Taxpayers are not required to file a federal income tax return, because the instructions and regulations associated with the Form 1040 do not display an OMB control number as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act
  3. Contention:  African Americans can claim a special tax credit as reparations for slavery and other oppressive treatment
  4. Contention:  Taxpayers are entitled to a refund of the Social Security taxes paid over their lifetime
  5. Contention:  An “untaxing” package or trust provides a way of legally and permanently avoiding the obligation to file federal income tax returns and pay federal income taxes
  6. Contention:  A “corporation sole” can be established and used for the purpose of avoiding federal income taxes
  7. Contention:  Taxpayers who did not purchase and use fuel for an off-highway business can claim the fuels tax credit.
  8. Contention:  A Form 1099-OID can be used as a debt payment option or the form or a purported financial instrument may be used to obtain money from the Treasury

 

D.   Constitutional Amendment Claims

1.    Contention:  Taxpayers can refuse to pay income taxes on religious or moral grounds by invoking the First Amendment.

Some individuals or groups claim that taxpayers may refuse to pay federal income taxes based on their religious or moral beliefs, or an objection to the use of taxes to fund certain government programs.  These persons mistakenly invoke the First Amendment in support of this frivolous position.

The Law: The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”  The First Amendment, however, does not provide a right to refuse to pay income taxes on religious or moral grounds or because taxes are used to fund government programs opposed by the taxpayer.  The First Amendment does not protect commercial speech or speech that aids or incites taxpayers to unlawfully refuse to pay federal income taxes, including speech that promotes abusive tax avoidance schemes.

Relevant Case Law:

United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252, 260 (1982) – the Supreme Court held that the broad public interest in maintaining a sound tax system is of such importance that religious beliefs in conflict with the payment of taxes provide no basis for refusing to pay, and stated that “[t]he tax system could not function if denominations were allowed to challenge the tax system because tax payments were spent in a manner that violates their religious belief.”

Jenkins v. Commissioner, 483 F.3d 90, 92 (2d Cir. 2007) – upholding the imposition of a $5,000 frivolous return penalty against the taxpayer, the court held that the collection of tax revenues for expenditures that offended the religious beliefs of individual taxpayers did not violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, or the Ninth Amendment. 

United States v. Indianapolis Baptist Temple, 224 F.3d 627, 629-31 (7th Cir. 2000) – the court rejected defendant’s Free Exercise challenge to the federal employment tax as those laws were not restricted to the defendant or other religion-related employers generally, and there was no indication that they were enacted for the purpose of burdening religious practices.

Adams v. Commissioner, 170 F.3d 173, 175-82 (3d Cir. 1999) – the court affirmed adjudged tax deficiencies and penalties for failure to file tax returns and pay tax, holding that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act did not require that the federal income tax accommodate Adams’ religious beliefs that payment of taxes to fund the military is against the will of God, and that her beliefs did not constitute reasonable cause for purposes of the penalties. 

United States v. Ramsey, 992 F.2d 831, 833 (8th Cir. 1993) – the court rejected Ramsey’s argument that filing federal income tax returns and paying federal income taxes violates his pacifist religious beliefs and stated that Ramsey “has no First Amendment right to avoid federal income taxes on religious grounds.”

Wall v. United States, 756 F.2d 52 (8th Cir. 1985) – the court upheld the imposition of a $500 frivolous return penalty against Wall for taking a “war tax deduction” on his federal income tax return based on his religious convictions and stated the “necessities of revenue collection through a sound tax system raise governmental interests sufficiently compelling to outweigh the free exercise rights of those who find the tax objectionable on bona fide religious grounds.”

United States v. Peister, 631 F.2d. 658, 665 (10th Cir. 1980) – the court rejected Peister’s argument that he was exempt from income tax based on his vow of poverty after he became the minister of a church he formed and found his First Amendment right to freedom of religion was not violated.

2.    Contention:  Federal income taxes constitute a “taking” of property without due process of law, violating the Fifth Amendment.

Some individuals or groups assert that the collection of federal income taxes constitutes a “taking” of property without due process of law, in violation of the Fifth Amendment.  Thus, any attempt by the IRS to collect federal income taxes owed by a taxpayer is unconstitutional.

The Law: The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that a person shall not be “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law . . . .”  The United States Supreme Court stated that “it is . . . well settled that [the Fifth Amendment] is not a limitation upon the taxing power conferred upon Congress by the Constitution; in other words, that the Constitution does not conflict with itself by conferring, upon the one hand, a taxing power, and taking the same power away, on the other, by the limitations of the due process clause.”  Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R., 240 U.S. 1, 24 (1916).  Further, the Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the summary administrative procedures contained in the Internal Revenue Code against due process challenges, on the basis that a post?collection remedy (e.g., a tax refund suit) exists and is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of constitutional due process.  Phillips v. Commissioner, 283 U.S. 589, 595?97 (1931).

The Internal Revenue Code provides methods to ensure due process to taxpayers:  (1) the “refund method,” set forth in section 7422(e) and 28 U.S.C. '' 1341 and 1346(a), in which a taxpayer must pay the full amount of the tax and then sue in a federal district court or in the United States Court of Federal Claims for a refund; and (2) the “deficiency method,” set forth in section 6213(a), in which a taxpayer may, without paying the contested tax, petition the United States Tax Court to redetermine a tax deficiency asserted by the IRS.  Courts have found that both methods provide constitutional due process.

The IRS discussed this frivolous argument in more detail and warned taxpayers of the consequences of attempting to pursue a claim on these grounds in Rev. Rul. 2005-19, 2005-1 C.B. 819.

For a discussion of frivolous tax arguments made in collection due process cases arising under sections 6320 and 6330, see Section II of this outline.

Relevant Case Law:

Flora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145, 175 (1960) – the Supreme Court held that a taxpayer must pay the full tax assessment before being able to file a refund suit in district court, noting that a person has the right to appeal an assessment to the Tax Court “without paying a cent.”

Schiff v. United States, 919 F.2d 830 (2d Cir. 1990) – the court rejected a due process claim of a taxpayer who chose not to avail himself of the opportunity to appeal a deficiency notice to the Tax Court.

3.    Contention:  Taxpayers do not have to file returns or provide financial information because of the protection against self-incrimination found in the Fifth Amendment.

Some individuals or groups claim that taxpayers may refuse to file federal income tax returns, or may submit tax returns on which they refuse to provide any financial information, because they believe that their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination will be violated.

The Law:  There is no constitutional right to refuse to file an income tax return on the ground that it violates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self?incrimination.  As the Supreme Court has stated, a taxpayer cannot “draw a conjurer’s circle around the whole matter by his own declaration that to write any word upon the government blank would bring him into danger of the law.”  United States v. Sullivan, 274 U.S. 259, 264 (1927).  The failure to comply with the filing and reporting requirements of the federal tax laws will not be excused based upon blanket assertions of the constitutional privilege against compelled self?incrimination under the Fifth Amendment.

The IRS discussed this frivolous argument in more detail and warned taxpayers of the consequences of attempting to pursue a claim on these grounds.  Rev. Rul. 2005-19, 2005-1 C.B. 819.

Relevant Case Law:

Sochia v. Commissioner, 23 F.3d 941 (5th Cir. 1994) – the court affirmed tax assessments and penalties for failure to file returns, failure to pay taxes, and filing a frivolous return and imposed sanctions for pursuing a frivolous case because the taxpayers claimed a Fifth Amendment privilege on each line calling for financial information, rather than provide any information on their tax return about income and expenses.

United States v. Neff, 615 F.2d 1235, 1241 (9th Cir. 1980) – the court affirmed a failure to file conviction, noting that the taxpayer “did not show that his response to the tax form questions would have been self-incriminating.  He cannot, therefore, prevail on his Fifth Amendment claim.”

Posted by editor on Sunday, April 13 @ 17:29:41 MST (47 reads)
(Read More... | 122687 bytes more | Score: 0)



FRIVOLOUS ARGUMENTS IN COLLECTION DUE PROCESS CASES
The Junk Yard Dog

FRIVOLOUS ARGUMENTS IN COLLECTION DUE PROCESS CASES

Under sections 6320 (pertaining to liens) and 6330 (pertaining to levies), the IRS must provide taxpayers notice and an opportunity for an administrative appeals hearing upon the filing of a notice of federal tax lien (section 6320) and prior to or after levy (section 6330). Taxpayers have the right to seek judicial review of the IRS’s determination in these proceedings. I.R.C. § 6330(d). These reviews can extend to the merits of the underlying tax liability, if the taxpayer has not previously received the opportunity for review of the merits, e.g., did not receive a notice of deficiency. I.R.C. § 6330(c)(2)(B). A face-to-face administrative hearing concerning a taxpayer’s underlying liability will not be granted if the hearing request raises solely frivolous arguments. Treas. Reg. §§ 301.6320-1(d)(2) Q&A D8 and 301.6330-1(d)(2) Q&A D8. The Tax Court will impose sanctions pursuant to section 6673 against taxpayers who seek judicial relief based upon frivolous or groundless positions.

On December 6, 2006, Congress passed the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (TRHCA), Pub. L. No. 109-432, 120 Stat. 2922 (2006). Section 407 of TRHCA revised sections 6320 and 6330. The TRHCA amended section 6330 by adding new subsection (g) to provide that the IRS may disregard any portion of a section 6320 or 6330 hearing request that is based upon a position identified as frivolous by the IRS in a published list or that reflects a desire to delay or impede tax administration. Such portion shall not be subject to any further administrative or judicial review. If the entire hearing request meets one or both of these criteria, the hearing request will be denied.  The TRHCA also amended section 6702 to allow imposition of a $5,000 penalty for specified frivolous submissions, including frivolous section 6320 or 6330 hearing requests, where any portion of the submission meets one or both of these criteria.  See section III below.  These amendments are effective for hearing requests made after March 15, 2007, the release date of Notice 2007-30, 2007-1 C.B. 883, which listed frivolous positions (most recently updated by Notice 2010-33, 2010-1 C.B. 609). Accordingly, when the TRHCA amendments are applicable, a taxpayer raising only frivolous issues may not only be ineligible for a face-to-face hearing but may be denied any section 6320 or 6330 hearing.

This section discusses some of the common frivolous tax arguments raised in collection due process cases.

A. Invalidity of the Assessment
  1. Contention: A tax assessment is invalid because the taxpayer did not get a copy of the Form 23C, the Form 23C was not personally signed by the Secretary of the Treasury, or a form other than Form 23C is not a valid record of assessment
  2. Contention: A tax assessment is invalid because the assessment was made from a substitute for return prepared pursuant to section 6020(b), which is not a valid return
B. Invalidity of the Statutory Notice of Deficiency
  1. Contention: A statutory notice of deficiency is invalid because it was not signed by the Secretary of the Treasury or by someone with delegated authority
  2. Contention: A statutory notice of deficiency is invalid because the taxpayer did not file an income tax return
C. Invalidity of Notice of Federal Tax Lien
  1. Contention: A notice of federal tax lien is invalid because it is unsigned or not signed by the Secretary of the Treasury, or because IRS employees lack the delegated authority to file a notice of federal tax lien
  2. Contention: The form or content of a notice of federal tax lien is controlled by or subject to a state or local law, and a notice of federal tax lien that does not comply in form or content with a state or local law is invalid
D. Invalidity of Collection Due Process Notice
  1. Contention: A collection due process notice (e.g., Letter 1058, LT-11 or Letter 3172) is invalid because it is not signed by the Secretary or his delegate
  2. Contention: A collection due process notice is invalid because no certificate of assessment is attached
E. Verification Given as Required by I.R.C. § 6330(c)(1)
  1. Contention: Verification requires the production of certain documents
F. Invalidity of Statutory Notice and Demand
  1. Contention: No notice and demand, as required by I.R.C. § 6303, was ever received by taxpayer
  2. Contention: A notice and demand is invalid because it is not signed, it is not on the correct form (such as Form 17), or because no certificate of assessment is attached
G. Tax Court Authority
  1. Contention: The Tax Court does not have the authority to decide legal issues
H. Challenges to the Authority of IRS Employees
  1. Contention: Revenue Officers are not authorized to seize property in satisfaction of unpaid taxes
  2. Contention: IRS employees lack credentials.  For example, they have no pocket commission or the wrong color identification badge
I. Use of Unauthorized Representatives
  1. Contention: Taxpayers are entitled to be represented at hearings, such as collection due process hearings, and in court, by persons without valid powers of attorney
J. No Authorization Under I.R.C. § 7401 to Bring Action
  1. Contention: The Secretary has not authorized an action for the collection of taxes and penalties or the Attorney General has not directed an action be commenced for the collection of taxes and penalties

A.    Invalidity of the Assessment

1.    Contention:  A tax assessment is invalid because the taxpayer did not get a copy of the Form 23C, the Form 23C was not personally signed by the Secretary of the Treasury, or a form other than Form 23C is not a valid record of assessment.

The Law: Tax assessments are formally recorded on a record of assessment. I.R.C. § 6203. The assessment is made by an assessment officer signing the summary record of assessment. Treas. Reg. § 301.6203-1. The summary record of assessment must “provide identification of the taxpayer, the character of the liability assessed, the taxable period, if applicable, and the amount of the assessment.” Id. The date of the assessment is the date the summary record is signed. Id. There is no requirement in the statute or regulation that the assessment be recorded on a specific form, that the Secretary of the Treasury personally sign it, or that the taxpayer be provided with a copy of the record of assessment before the IRS takes collection action. 

The IRS has refuted the frivolous argument that before the IRS may collect overdue taxes, the IRS must provide taxpayers with a summary record of assessment made on a Form 23-C, Assessment Certificate – Summary Record of Assessments, or on another particular form in Rev. Rul. 2007-21, 2007-1 C.B. 865.

Relevant Case Law:

March v. IRS, 335 F.3d 1186, 1188 (10th Cir. 2003) – the court held that the computer-generated certificate of assessment and payment form utilized by the IRS to make assessment against the taxpayers satisfied the regulatory requirements because the computer-generated form contained the same information as the non-computer-generated form previously used and was signed by the assessment officer.

Powell v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-174, 98 T.C.M. (CCH) 56 (2009) – the court awarded a $25,000 section 6673 penalty against the petitioner for asserting, among other frivolous arguments, that respondent was obligated to produce a Form 23C even though petitioner received notices of deficiency.

Williams v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-94, 89 T.C.M. (CCH) 114 (2005) – in this collection due process case, the court held that it was not an abuse of discretion for the Appeals Officer to provide copies of the transcripts of account (so-called MFTRA-X transcripts) to the petitioner in lieu of the copies of the assessment documents that the petitioner had requested.

Roberts v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 365 (2002) – the court held that there was nothing in the law to show that the use of the Revenue Accounting Control System (RACS) report was not in compliance with the statute and regulation.

Nestor v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 162 (2002) – the court held that the petitioner was not entitled to production of Form 23C at his collection due process hearing and it was not an abuse of discretion for the Appeals Officer to use Form 4340, Certificate of Assessments and Payments to verify the assessment, for purposes of section 6330(c)(1).

Other Cases:

Chang v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-100, 93 T.C.M. (CCH) 1143 (2007); Perez v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-274, 84 T.C.M. (CCH) 501 (2002).

2.    Contention: A tax assessment is invalid because the assessment was made from a substitute for return prepared pursuant to section 6020(b), which is not a valid return.

The Law: Section 6020(b)(1) provides that “[i]f any person fails to make any return required by any internal revenue law or regulation made thereunder at the time prescribed therefore, or makes, willfully or otherwise, a false or fraudulent return, the Secretary shall make such return from his own knowledge and from such information as he can obtain through testimony or otherwise.”  Section 6020(b)(2) further provides that any return prepared pursuant to section 6020(b)(1) shall be prima facie good and sufficient for all legal purposes.  See also Treas. Reg. § 301.6020-1.

Relevant Case Law:

Douglas v. United States, 324 F. App’x 320, 321 (5th Cir. 2009) – the court rejected the taxpayer’s claim that “the IRS committed ‘fraud’” by completing a section 6020(b) return and held that the IRS properly issued notices of levy.

Nicklaus v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-156, 89 T.C.M. (CCH) 1499 (2005) - the court held that the IRS may prepare substitute returns for taxpayers who fail to do so themselves under section 6020(b). 

Other Cases:

United States v. Updegrave, 1997 WL 297074, 97-1 U.S.T.C. ¶ 50,465 (E.D. Pa. May 28, 1997);Holland v. Louisiana Sec’y of Revenue & Taxation, 97-1 U.S.T.C. ¶ 50,403 (W.D. La. Feb. 7, 1997).

Posted by editor on Sunday, April 13 @ 17:20:21 MST (45 reads)
(Read More... | 106137 bytes more | Score: 0)



PENALTIES FOR PURSUING FRIVOLOUS TAX ARGUMENTS
The Junk Yard Dog

PENALTIES FOR PURSUING FRIVOLOUS TAX ARGUMENTS

Those who act on frivolous positions risk a variety of civil and criminal penalties.  Those who adopt these positions may face harsher consequences than those who merely promote them.  “Like moths to a flame, some people find themselves irresistibly drawn to the tax protester movement’s illusory claim that there is no legal requirement to pay federal income tax.  And, like moths, these people sometimes get burned.”  United States v. Sloan, 939 F.2d 499, 499-500 (7th Cir. 1991).

Taxpayers filing returns with frivolous positions may be subject to the accuracy-related penalty under section 6662 (twenty percent of the underpayment attributable to negligence or disregard of rules or regulations) or the civil fraud penalty under section 6663 (seventy-five percent of the underpayment attributable to fraud) or the erroneous claim for refund penalty under section 6676 (twenty percent of the excessive amount).  Additionally, late filed returns setting forth frivolous positions may be subject to an addition to tax under section 6651(f) for fraudulent failure to timely file an income tax return (triple the amount of the standard failure to file addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1)).  See Mason v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-247, 88 T.C.M. (CCH) 398 (2004) (stating that frivolous arguments “may be indicative of fraud if made in conjunction with affirmative acts designed to evade paying federal income tax”).

The Tax Relief Health Care Act of 2006 amended section 6702 to allow imposition of a $5,000 penalty for frivolous tax returns and for specified frivolous submissions other than returns, if the purported returns or specified submissions are either based upon a position identified as frivolous by the IRS in a published list or reflect a desire to delay or impede tax administration.  Pub. L. No. 109-432, § 407(a), 120 Stat. 2922 (2006).  The term “specified submission” means: a request for a hearing under section 6320 (relating to notice and opportunity for hearing on filing of a notice of lien), a request for hearing under section 6330 (relating to notice and opportunity for hearing before levy), an application under section 6159 (relating to agreements for payment of tax liability in installments), an application under section 7122 (relating to compromises), or an application under section 7811 (relating to taxpayer assistance orders).  This amendment is effective for frivolous returns or specified frivolous submissions made after March 15, 2007, the release date of Notice 2007-30, 2007-1 C.B. 883, which identified the list of frivolous positions (last updated by Notice 2010-33, 2010-1 C.B. 609)

Section 6673(a) allows the Tax Court to impose a penalty of up to $25,000 when it appears that:

  • a taxpayer instituted or maintained a proceeding primarily for delay,
  • a taxpayer’s position in such proceeding is frivolous or groundless, or
  • a taxpayer unreasonably failed to pursue administrative remedies.

“The purpose of § 6673 . . . is to induce litigants to conform their behavior to the governing rules regardless of their subjective beliefs.  Groundless litigation diverts the time and energies of judges from more serious claims; it imposes needless costs on other litigants.  Once the legal system has resolved a claim, judges and lawyers must move on to other things.  They cannot endlessly rehear stale arguments . . . . [T]here is no constitutional right to bring frivolous suits . . . . People who wish to express displeasure with taxes must choose other forums, and there are many available.” Coleman v. Commissioner, 791 F.2d 68, 72 (7th Cir. 1986) (emphasis in original). 

A tax return preparer, as defined by section 7701(a)(36), who prepares any return or claim of refund with respect to which any part of an understatement of liability is due to an unreasonable position, including any frivolous position discussed in this outline, and who knew or reasonably should have known of the position may be required to pay a penalty equal to the greater of $1,000 or 50 percent of the income derived by the tax return preparer with respect to the preparation of the return or claim for refund.  I.R.C. § 6694(a).  The minimum penalty amount increases to $5,000 for willful or reckless conduct of the tax return preparer.  I.R.C. § 6694(b).  The IRS may impose a penalty of $1,000 for aiding or assisting in the preparation or presentation of any portion of a return with knowledge that it will result in an understatement of tax liability.  I.R.C. § 6701(a). 

Taxpayers who rely on frivolous arguments may also face criminal prosecution.   These taxpayers may be convicted of a felony for attempting to evade or defeat tax.  I.R.C. § 7201.  Section 7201 provides as a penalty a fine of up to $100,000 ($500,000 in the case of a corporation) and imprisonment for up to 5 years.  Similarly, taxpayers may be convicted of a felony for willfully making and signing under penalties of perjury any return, statement, or other document that the person does not believe to be true and correct as to every material matter.  I.R.C. § 7206(1).  The penalty for violating section 7206 is a fine of up to $100,000 ($500,000 in the case of a corporation) and imprisonment for up to 3 years.  Any individual found guilty of either offense may be subject to an increased fine of up to $250,000.  18 U.S.C. § 3571(b)(3). 

Persons who promote frivolous arguments and those who assist taxpayers in claiming tax benefits based on frivolous arguments may be prosecuted for a criminal felony for which the penalty is up to $100,000 ($500,000 in the case of a corporation) and imprisonment for up to 3 years for assisting with or advising about the preparation or presentation of a false return or other document under the internal revenue laws.  I.R.C. § 7206(2).   Any individual found guilty of a felony under section 7206 may be subject to an increased fine of up to $250,000.  18 U.S.C. § 3571(b)(3).   

Relevant Case Law:

Deyo v. United States, 296 F. App’x 157, 158 (2d Cir. 2008) – the court held that the IRS complied with any applicable personal approval requirement of section 6751 and upheld the assessment of penalties against a married couple for filing frivolous income tax returns, on which the taxpayers claimed zero adjusted gross income based on the frivolous position that they did not receive any income from sources listed in the regulations under section 861. 

Szopa v. United States, 460 F.3d 884, 887 (7th Cir. 2006) – the court found that a frivolous tax appeal warranted a presumptive sanction of $4,000, but imposed an $8,000 sanction against the taxpayer for repeatedly filing frivolous appeals.

Gass v. United States, 4 F. App’x 565 (10th Cir. 2001) – the court imposed an $8,000 penalty on the taxpayer for contending that taxes on income from real property are unconstitutional. 

Brashier v. Commissioner, 12 F. App’x 698 (10th Cir. 2001) – the court imposed $1,000 penalties on taxpayers who argued that filing sworn income tax returns violated their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, after the Tax Court had warned them that their argument – rejected consistently for more than seventy years – was frivolous.

Baskin v. United States, 738 F.2d 975 (8th Cir. 1984) – the court found that the IRS’s assessment of a frivolous return penalty without a judicial hearing was not a denial of due process because there was an adequate opportunity for a later judicial determination of legal rights.

Jones v. Commissioner, 688 F.2d 17 (6th Cir. 1982) – the court found the taxpayer’s claim that his wages were paid in “depreciated bank notes” as clearly without merit and affirmed the Tax Court’s imposition of an addition to tax for negligence or intentional disregard of rules and regulations.

United States v. Rempel, 87 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1810 (D. Ark. 2001) – the court warned the taxpayers of sanctions and stated: “It is apparent to the court from some of the papers filed by the Rempels that they have at least had access to some of the publications of tax protester organizations.”  The court went on to say, “The publications of these organizations have a bad habit of giving lots of advice without explaining the consequences which can flow from the assertion of totally discredited legal positions and/or meritless factual positions.”

Rowe v. United States, 583 F. Supp. 1516, 1520 (D. Del. 1984), aff’d, 749 F.2d 27 (3d Cir. 1984) – the court upheld the viability of section 6702 penalties against various objections, including that it was unconstitutionally vague because it does not define a “frivolous” return.  AFrivolous is commonly understood to mean having no basis in law or fact,” the court stated.

Other Cases:

Holker v. United States, 737 F.2d 751, 752-53 (8th Cir. 1984); McAfee v. United States, 2001-1 U.S.T.C. (CCH) ¶ 50,433 (N.D. Ga. 2001).

Sanctions Imposed Generally in Tax Court Cases:

Lee v. Commissioner, 463 F. App’x 236 (5th Cir. 2012) – the court affirmed the Tax Court’s sua sponte imposition of a $1,000 section 6673 penalty when the taxpayer had argued that the amounts shown on her Form 1099 were not taxable income, she was not a person subject to tax, and she was not involved in a trade or business.

Leyva v. Commissioner, 483 F. App’x 371 (9th Cir. 2012) – the court affirmed the Tax Court’s imposition of the section 6673 penalty against the petitioner after petitioner argued that the IRS was prohibited from collecting income tax from him because he had filed a Form 1040 reporting zero income.

Thomason v. Commissioner, 401 F. App’x 921 (5th Cir. 2010) – the court affirmed the Tax Court’s imposition of a $2,000 penalty against petitioner under section 6673 because petitioner made numerous frivolous arguments, including that the section 6020(b) substitute tax return prepared by the IRS was invalid and that United States citizens are exempt from paying income tax on income earned in the United States.

Tinnerman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2010-150 – the court imposed a $25,000 penalty under section 6673 in a CDP case for delaying the proceedings by making “stale and recycled” frivolous arguments. 

Precourt v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2010-24 – against a background of eleven separate actions in which the taxpayer advanced frivolous arguments in both Tax Court and district court, as well as previous sanctions against the taxpayer of over $22,000, the Tax Court dismissed the taxpayer’s case and imposed the maximum penalty of $25,000 for failing to appear for court proceedings and for failing to comply with court orders.  In addition to petitioner’s dilatory conduct, his petition was plagued with frivolous constitutional and other claims.

McCammon v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2008-114, 95 T.C.M. (CCH) 1421 (2008) – the court imposed a $25,000 sanction against a taxpayer who argued that she “did not have any income ‘in a constitutional sense,’” despite almost $200,000 paid to the taxpayer in her medical practice and despite being previously warned by the court against instituting meritless proceedings.

Stearman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-39, 89 T.C.M. (CCH) 823 (2005), aff’d, 436 F.3d 533 (5th Cir. 2006) – the court imposed sanctions totaling $25,000 against the taxpayer for advancing arguments characteristic of tax-protester rhetoric that has been universally rejected by the courts, including arguments regarding the Sixteenth Amendment.  In affirming the Tax Court’s holding, the Fifth Circuit granted the government’s request for further sanctions of $6,000 against the taxpayer for maintaining frivolous arguments on appeal, and the Fifth Circuit imposed an additional $6,000 sanctions on its own, for total additional sanctions of $12,000.

Haines v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-126, 79 T.C.M. (CCH) 1844, 1846 (2000) – stating that “[p]etitioner knew or should have known that his position was groundless and frivolous, yet he persisted in maintaining this proceeding primarily to impede the proper workings of our judicial system and to delay the payment of his Federal income tax liabilities,” the court imposed a $25,000 penalty.

Other Cases:

Rodriguez v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-92, 97 T.C.M. (CCH) 1482 (2009); Rhodes v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2008-225, 96 T.C.M. (CCH) 215 (2008); Hanloh v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-194, 92 T.C.M. (CCH) 266 (2006).

Sanctions Imposed in Collection Due Process Cases:

Oropeza v. Commissioner, 402 F. App’x 221 (9th Cir. 2010) – the court affirmed the imposition of a $10,000 penalty on the taxpayer for raising frivolous and groundless arguments related to collection due process.

Posted by editor on Sunday, April 13 @ 14:57:51 MST (39 reads)
(Read More... | 124245 bytes more | Score: 0)



Getting Screwed in Northampton County
The Junk Yard Dog Getting Screwed in Northampton County

Getting Screwed in Northampton County

By its government

Its Elected Officials

 

NORTHAMPTON COUNTY BOARD

OF SUPERVISORS

IS PROPOSING TO COMPLETELY REWRITE THE CURRENT

ZONING ORDINANCES BY:

  • Eliminating the Chesapeake Bay Protections from the Seaside, putting a $50 million aquaculture industry at risk;

Increasing the number of houses per/acre 400-4,000%, especially along the waterfront areas;

Eliminating Special Use permits for adverse land uses, by-passing neighbor notification and public hearings (said it would be "easier" on staff;

Allow intensive chicken farming with reduced setbacks and eliminating odor control;

Reduce waterfront lot widths to 60' promoting condo-type development on the edge of our wateways;

Promoting industrial parks and large scale development along Route 13, which is the only area where our aquifers are recharged;

Changing the by-right uses in agricultural districts to include: bio-mass refineries, 199' wind turbines with no noise ordiances (they tell us to "call the sheriff"), recreational vehicle parks, wastewater treatment plants, commercial hunting preserves, etc.

Allowing uses with Special Use in agricultural zones including; dredge spoil disposal, prisons, "commercial services" ?, mining of soil or other natural resources,

auto and motorcycle race tracks, etc. (over)

HISTORY OF ACTIONS BY SUPERVISORS

Beginning in 2005, the NC Planning Commission along with consultants, citizen committees, Planning Staff and neighborhood associations began an exhaustive process to update the county's Comprehensive Plan. The final plan directed the county to: "maintain the county's predominantly rural character by promoting agriculture,aquaculture, and sustainable tourism as the main economic industries and as preferred land uses in the county [Pg. 17 2009 Comp Plan]. It also instructed the county to enact zoning that would "protect groundwater resources, historic resources, protect the coastal ecosystems, wetland, the Barrier islands, and coastal shellfish areas."

In 2013, after hiring an expert in industrial and commercial real estate development as "economic development director", the BOS directed planning staff to shut out the public and the Planning Commission and completely rewrite the zoning ordinances to give the new director "the tools he needed" to intensively develop Northampton County. Because state code calls for any zoning to be consistent with the adopted Comp Plan, we feel this process is not consistent with the state laws governing land use planning. The BOS also gave the Planning Commission just 100 days to make a recommendation on the 125-page document or they would "consider it approved." They imposed a deadline of May 31,2014, with only one public hearing.

It is clear that the Northampton County Board of Supervisors has turned their back on the citizens of this great county and are acting on the behalf of their own personal, as well as private, interests. We urge all residents to call their elected supervisor and tell them to STOP THIS ASSAULT ON THE EASTERN SHORE. Larry Trala (phone no.) Larry LeMond (phone #) Oliver Bennet (phone #) Dick Hubbard (phone #) (Granville Hog (phone#) signed Citizens for Open Government

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online
Posted by editor on Sunday, April 13 @ 06:38:06 MST (38 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)



How to Get Rid Of the Virginia Beach City Council
Re-Branded Politics Impeqch Virginia Beach City Council

How to Get Rid Of the Virginia Beach City Council

How to Impeach The Virginia Beach City Council

Removal of Elected and Certain Appointed Officers by Courts

Text in effect from and after March 23, 2011

Title 24.2 Elections

Chap. 2 Federal, Commonwealth, and Local Officers, §§ 24.2-200 — 24.2-238

Art. 7 Removal of Public Officers from Office, §§ 24.2-230 — 24.2-238

§ 24.2-233. Removal of elected and certain appointed officers by courts. — Upon petition, a circuit court may remove from office any elected officer or officer who has been appointed to fill an elective office, residing within the jurisdiction of the court:

1. For neglect of duty, misuse of office, or incompetence in the performance of duties when that neglect of duty, misuse of office, or incompetence in the performance of duties has a material adverse effect upon the conduct of the office, or

2. Upon conviction of a misdemeanor pursuant to Article 1 (§ 18.2-247 et seq.) or Article 1.1 (§ 18.2-265.1 et seq.) of Chapter 7 of Title 18.2 and after all rights of appeal have terminated involving the:

a. Manufacture, sale, gift, distribution, or possession with intent to manufacture, sell, give, or distribute a controlled substance, marijuana, or synthetic cannabinoids as defined in § 18.2-248.1:1, or

b. Sale, possession with intent to sell, or placing an advertisement for the purpose of selling drug paraphernalia, or

 

c. Possession of any controlled substance, marijuana, or synthetic cannabinoids as defined in § 18.2-248.1:1, and such conviction under a, b, or c has a material adverse effect upon the conduct of such office, or

3. Upon conviction, and after all rights of appeal have terminated, of a misdemeanor involving a "hate crime" as that term is defined in § 52-8.5 when the conviction has a material adverse effect upon the conduct of such office.

The petition must be signed by a number of registered voters who reside within the jurisdiction of the officer equal to ten percent of the total number of votes cast at the last election for the office that the officer holds.

Any person removed from office under the provisions of subdivision 2 or 3 may not be subsequently subject to the provisions of this section for the same criminal offense. (1975, cc. 515, 595, § 24.1-79.5; 1989, c. 470; 1993, c. 641; 2002, cc. 588, 623; 2011, cc. 384, 410.)



§ 24.2-234. Removal of officer appointed for a term certain. — Any officer appointed to an office for a term established by law may be removed from office, under the provisions of § 24.2-233, upon a petition filed with the circuit court in whose jurisdiction the officer resides signed by the person or a majority of the members of the authority who appointed him, if the appointing person or authority is not given the unqualified power of removal.

The circuit court also shall proceed pursuant to § 24.2-235 for the removal of a member of a local electoral board or general registrar upon a petition signed by a majority of the members of the State Board of Elections as provided in § 24.2-103. (1975, cc. 515, 595, § 24.1-79.6; 1993, c. 641; 2004, cc. 27, 391.)

Posted by editor on Thursday, April 10 @ 19:22:12 MST (125 reads)
(Read More... | 10246 bytes more | Score: 0)



Old Articles

Thursday, April 10
· The Grand Obama Party / Hillary / Obama / Benghazi
· The New the fiscal discipline tradition of Virginia
Sunday, April 06
· 9 month old accused of attempt of murder in moslem land!!!
Friday, April 04
· Virginia Remember Who Screwed You Over!!!
· Identifying What's 'Reasonable' in Due Diligence
· THE PERPETUATION OF RESIDENTIAL RACIAL SEGREGATION
Sunday, March 30
· Greatest Treasure Ever Found???
· No Putin Out For Obama
· Kerry Dougherty, God bless her heart,  She tries ~ Really tires, But some times
· More proof that Obama is full of schitt !!!
· With OBAMA: Nothing important has worked as promised !!
Thursday, March 27
· Teen wins $70K after school accesses her Facebook
· How to delete all hyperlinks in Word document with shortcut key?
· Can Beach City Manager get tutored by the Chesapeake City Manager
· Mayo gave his life defending an Obama policy failure!!!!
Wednesday, March 26
· Two Tax Credits Help Pay Higher Education Costs
· Obama pissing away more of your tax dollars overseas
· Soros and Lagarde’s IMF vs Putin’s Russia
· Obama threatens to insert a Federal fink in their newsrooms to see how they cove
· The Harvard Fraud and his manor house
Tuesday, March 25
· TEA TIME at the Supreme Court / Protest
· WAGNER AND BUDS SCREWING VIRGINIA AGAIN?
Monday, March 24
· 9 Essential Tips to Speed Up Windows 7
Saturday, March 22
· Durbin Amendment is a half ass piece of legislative work says Court
· Proof that the 7th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution works
· !!!Obama!!! Schmuck-in-Chief [SIC]
· Bogus ICE reports enough for impeachment??
· Obama kills another Jew for Allah?
· the marxist Obamacare and Herring support
Friday, March 21
· The Lipscomb Connection to the Hindenburg

Older Articles

LA Times on Politics

·Conservative group apologizes for post-Aurora photo in campaign ad
·New Senate polls offer three lessons and some hope for Democrats
·U.S. spy chief bans employees from talking to journalists
·Obama's approval rating improves as healthcare drag eases
·First lady emphasizes fun and fitness at annual Easter Egg Roll
·Obama names Washington veteran Neil Eggleston as White House counsel
·For Hillary Rodham Clinton, archives evoke fiery White House years
·Obama administration delays decision on Keystone XL pipeline
·Crisis manager leaves White House counsel's office
·Establishment bites back: Chamber fights tea party in Senate races

read more...

Forward

·Two Synagogue-Goers Save Family From Burning Car in London
·Aaron Landes, Philadelphia Rabbi and Navy Chaplain, Dies at 84
·Pro-Russian Separatists Admit Detaining Jewish Journalist in Eastern Ukraine
·U.S. 'Disappointed' by Palestinian Unity Deal
·1,000 Plan To Attend Limmud Moscow
·4 Hasidic Jews Busted in Beating of Gay Black Man in Brooklyn
·Israel Scraps Talks as Palestinians Forge Unity
·The Secret Jewish History of William Shakespeare
·U.S. Wants Dialogue on Hungary Holocaust Feud
·William Rapfogel Faces Up to 10 Years in Prison After Guilty Plea

read more...

Our Links To Reference Materials

HelpCom.Net's Amazon Store

Our Referenced Materials Can Be Found On Amazon.Com

Mouse Over and Click On the Amazon Logo

To Get your Copy of the Material

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online

Endorsement Authorizations, etc..

Published under HCN's:

[1] First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Rights:

The Constitution of the United States of America

1st Amendment

Freedom of Religion, of Speech, and of the Press. -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances .U.S. Constitution U.S. Con. 1st Amd. (1791);

The Constitution of the United States of America

5th Amendment

Rights of Accused in Criminal Proceedings. -- No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty [Noun (plural liberties) the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views: . . .; a right or privilege, especially a statutory one: the Bill of Rights was intended to secure basic civil liberties . . . via Oxford dictionary:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/liberty Added by HCN] , or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. U.S. Constitution U.S. Con. 5th Amd. (1791)

The Constitution of the United States of America

14th Amendment

Section 1. Citizenship Rights Not to Be Abridged by States. -- All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. U.S. Constitution U.S. Con. 14th Amd., § 1 (1868);

[2] Sections One [1], Two [2], Three [3], Seven [7], Eleven [11], Twelve [12] Fourteen [14], Fifteen [15] and Seventeen [17] Rights in the Virginia Constitution

[Under accepted principles of statutory construction, . . . , statutes dealing with the same subject matter should, to the extent possible, be read together, the object being to give effect to the legislative intent. [ Vollin v. Arlington Co. Electoral Bd., 216 Va. 674, 222 S.E.2d 793 [The Unalienable Rights Foundation (HCN) has found that there are over 570 cases that state the same principles of statutory construction] (1976)Opinion of the Attorney General 1991 Va. AG 24, 25 (1991)];

Art. 1 § 1 (1971) Bill of Rights ~ Va. Constitution; That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety . . . , [Emphasis added];

Art. 1 § 2 (1971) Bill of Rights ~ Va. Constitution; That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people, that magistrates (a civil officer who administers the law ~added by UARF) are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them, [Emphasis added];

Art. 1 § 3 (1971) Bill of Rights ~ Va. Constitution; That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and, whenever any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal [a sound, healthy, or prosperous state: well-being; : body politic, commonweal; Middle English wele, from Old English wela; akin to Old English wel well. First Known Use: before 12th century via http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/weal ~ added by UARF] [Emphasis added];

Art. 1 § 7 (1971) Bill of Rights ~ Va. Constitution; That all power of suspending laws, or the execution of laws, by any authority, without consent of the representatives of the people, is injurious to their rights, and ought not to be exercised.[Emphasis added];

Art. 1 § 11 (1971) Bill of Rights ~ Va. Constitution]; That no person shall be deprived of his life, liberty [Noun (plural liberties) the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views: . . .; a right or privilege, especially a statutory one: the Bill of Rights was intended to secure basic civil liberties . . . via Oxford dictionary:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/liberty Added by UARF], or property without due process of law . . . .[Emphasis added];

Art. 1 § 12 (1971)Bill of Rights ~ Va. Constitution; That the freedoms of speech and of the press are among the great bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained except by despotic governments; that any citizen may freely speak, write, and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right; that the General Assembly shall not pass any law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, nor the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for the redress of grievances. [Emphasis added];

Art. 1 § 14 (1971) Bill of Rights ~ Va. Constitution; That the people have a right to uniform government . . .[Emphasis added];

Art 1 § 15 (1971) Bill of Rights ~ Va. Constitution; That no free government, nor the blessings of liberty [Noun (plural liberties) the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views: . . .; a right or privilege, especially a statutory one: the Bill of Rights was intended to secure basic civil liberties . . . via Oxford dictionary:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/ liberty Added by UARF], can be preserved to any people, but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles; and by the recognition by all citizens that they have duties as well as rights, and that such rights cannot be enjoyed save in a society where law is respected and due process is observed. . . .[Emphasis added];

Art. 1 § 17 (1971) Bill of Rights ~ Va. Constitution; The rights enumerated in this Bill of Rights shall not be construed to limit other rights of the people not therein expressed [Emphasis added].

[3] Authorized by HCN, a person - "Person" includes any individual, corporation, partnership, association, cooperative, limited liability company, trust, joint venture, government, political subdivision, or any other legal or commercial entity and any successor, representative, agent, agency, or instrumentality thereof. (Code 1919, § 5; Code 1950, § 1-13; 1950, p. 22, § 1-13.19; 1988, c. 36; 2005, c. 839.)Virginia Code 1-230.

Not authorized [except HCN] nor paid for any other person, anyone, nor entity, by what ever name that entity or person might be called, by the candidate or any campaign election committee.

 

buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online

Become a HCN Commentator

HCN Commentators come from all walks of life brining original content that entertains, informs, and inspires HNC’s readers. They are credible, passionate and influential because of their knowledge of a specific topics. Join their ranks. 

HCN posts are part of an open academic discussion among professionals and they are not intended to constitute either a professional opinion or professional advice. It is for academic discussion purposes only. It in no way expresses the true opinion of the commentator. HCN provides an academic forum for the free and open expression and discussion of ideas, theories, and concepts about  issues relating to government/political policy. Creativity, speculation and rumination are encouraged. The comments published here should not be taken to represent the commenter's position or opinion in any present or future publication or litigation; they should be regarded as tentative thoughts, subject later rethinking and revision in accordance with future promulgations.  They are not to be taken as professional advice and do not create any professional relationship.  Additionally, notwithstanding anything contained in this e-mail or the provisions of any “electronic signature” law, no offer is intended to be extended or accepted hereby and it is the intention of the commenter, author, and/or sender that a contract may only be formed by a document physically signed by the author or an appropriate officer of the employer of the author or its relevant subsidiary as the case may be.

 

To Request to Become a HNC Commentator

 



buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online

Big Story of Today
There isn't a Biggest Story for Today, yet.

Hurricane
·The Atlantic hurricane season runs from June 1st through November 30th.

read more...

Gas Prices 1/2hr Updates

HELPcom.NET Gas News


Unalienable Rights Foundation
·What is a Public Record
·"Campaign Finance Reform" a discussion by George F. Will
·Executive Branch Review Conference ~ Federalist Society
·How to ''impeach'' the Northampton County Board of Supervisors
·THE PERPETUATION OF RESIDENTIAL RACIAL SEGREGATION
·Second Annual Executive Branch Review Conference
·Antonin on the Separation of Powers
·FTC amicus brief in Batman v. Facebook
·ARE WE LOSING THE RIGHT TO THE CIVIL JURY TRIAL?
·The Contraceptive Mandate

read more...


 

HELPcom.NET

Voter News and Issues

P.O. Box 65002
Virginia Beach, VA 23467-5002

E - Mail US






Google Search helpcom.net

All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © MMIX - MMXIV by Helpcom.net LLC [HCN].

Filed Under: Internet Law , Privacy , Advertising and Anti-Spam Regulations


You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php or ultramode.txt
Copyright; 2006 by HELPcom., LLC
 
buy medicines online pharmacy brand viagra online