How to Get DPH

[weishaupt1776]

I've been trying to get a hearing & my case file transferred from Ogden to my local office for years & I understand how ridiculous it is to try to get heard. They just want to override & seize.
I am trying to conceptualize first principles as far as what questions to ask in a situation like this. I do understand the basic format as laid out in the AILL book, but am wondering where to start.
The way they do it is like this:

• IRS proceeds by first Substituting a return for a case where not return is filed using uncertified information returns to establish a color of claim, then fraudulently makes a "dummy return" on 1040 form without authority[\u] as 1040 is conspicuously absent
• Thus without authority, in a secret default upon the people if they don't take the "proposal" to tax court, at the final determination which is made as if the people defaulted and the party takes the matter to the tax court thereafter, every argument is termed frivolous because only the IRS and court knows of an assumed default.
• The IRS moves to collection ignoring any paper rebuttal by the People and without any notorious default being made, thus a secret process that denies due process and equal treatment under the law.

Since I was totally green at this in 2002, they sent me a proposal of changes, which I rebutted & asked for a hearing & they just railroaded it & sent me a Notice of Deficiency.Here's how this works:

• IRM 25.6.5.4.8.6 (10-01-2001) Statutory Notice Of Deficiency (90 Day Letter) Statutory Notices Of Deficiency are proposed deficiency notices issued by Examination, Collection, Deferred Adverse Tax Consequence (DATC/ASTA) and the Underreporter functions . . . If the taxpayer does not petition the Tax Court, and does not agree to the deficiency, then the case is closed as unagreed and the deficiency can be assessed because the taxpayer defaulted . . .

The pertinent partof the Internal Revenue Manual quoted above, show the secret default which is not unlike “Heads IRS Wins, Tails you Lose” or getting a bill you don't owe, and if you complain it is assessed and collected because the party didn't further injure himself in expending time and property to take the matter to court and is considered in default.

• The IRS then takes the uncertified hearsay evidence information returns to "dummy" a SFR, then creates a form 4340 which is certified and used as evidence of an assessment if the "taxpayer" doesn't petition the tax court for appeal of the administrative "proposal"
• This fabricated default, virtually changing “unagreed” to “agreed”, is not notorious in any way and if the "taxpayer" doesn't injure himself by petition, he is held in default and no one is going to tell him, so upon the situation where a lien and levy naturally follows and the petitioner files for a Collection Due Process hearing, the IRS ignores everything but how the "taxpayer" is going to pay, much to the frustration of the "taxpayer" as he doesn't know he is in default and should be moving to set aside the default, to get back to the liability issue.

I'm just trying to put this in a logical order & use some of Marc's concepts in asking questions for my hearing. (If I can get one)

[Conspiracy Theory]

Weishaupt,
At the very least, they'll offer you the collection "due process" hearing. You might want to tell them that you want to tape that hearing. They'll probably refuse to let you; they generated an internal memo in May 2002 that says that they wouldn't allow CDPH taping anymore. However, put it on the record (in writing) that you wanted to tape the meeting but they wouldn't let you. When they issue their determination (which will most likely be "against" you, to no one's surprise), you can file in Tax Kourt to contest the "determination." One of the issues you should be able to use is that you couldn't tape it so there's no record of the hearing and nothing for the Kourt to examine. Several cases have been "remanded" back to the CDPH based on this issue where the Kourt told the IRS that they had give another CDPH and allow taping. Just make sure that you offer no arguments in writing prior to your CDPH because what they do is say," O.K. he couldn't tape it but he doesn't need a new hearing because all his arguments were frivolous and a new hearing would serve no purpose."

Aside from that, ask Marc if you can buy a script from him (this is a completely unsolicited testimonial) for use in the CDPH. I bought one from him for $50 and haven't used it yet but the questions are brillliant. As you can guess, the script doesn't take any position but just asks penetrating questions that will show that their "assessment," "liability," etc. is based on thin air.

Hope this helps. I know it's not the final answer but it's at least a shot.

[weishaupt1776]

Thanx for the reply, very informative. A little history of my case: I started out on the wrong foot using the Irwin Schiff "0" return/arguing the code method. All of my rebuttals up to the friv pen/We changed your return/Cp 504 were his material. I learned how this was useless, but had no new strategy when the NoD came in. I let it ride past the 90 days, because I was researching viable methods. Since I didn't contest in TC, they secretly defaulted me & are sending me CP504's. I invented a pretty unique response to those, & have requested a slew of docs from the Disc office regarding the SFR & who did it, etc. . . As it stands, the last correspondence was the CP504 with a notice of intent to levy & potential 3rd Party contactg, which I rebutted. I also started a default process on them & intend on publicly recording it soon.
The short term goal is to make a record in an administrative setting & record the default before TC.

[marc stevens]

For those who have not heard, listen to my interview with Ernie Hancock linked to my site. I discuss a pretended hearing. In my experience, no one gets the "Due Process Collection Hearing." Everyone in my experience is told the same thing, we never received your request.

In the case I discuss on the show, we showed the agents the request that went registered mail. The agent shrugged her shoulders and said she didn't know what the procedure was for a timely request. Yes, her job is to conduct these "hearings" and in almost six years she's never done one. And why?

That's right, no one has ever bothered to file a timely request.

[Conspiracy Theory]

Marc,
Where is the Ernest Hanthingly interview? I couldn't find it.

Thanks

[marc stevens]

It's actually Ernie Hanc-o-c-k for those who haven't figured out the program is censoring the last part. I need to look into that.

It's the very first link under the radio archives on my site, www.adventuresinlegalland.com.

[weishaupt1776]

I just received a 12153 Request for a DPH.
Sshould I use their form or should I use make my own?

I understand I am supposed to use REGISTERED MAIL. <br>
What is that opposed to certified mail? I tried asking a Post office clerk & they couldn't tell me. <br>
What process do I do for regisered?

If I use a process server, is it necessary to go registered?

What is a process server? Is it a Sherriff or a private entity?

[marc stevens]

I always send the form and my own letter. Without the form they have grounds to say I didn't request the hearing.

Certified is really just first class mail. Registered is better because every time the letter changes hands it is signed for. If someone disputes it, I can subpoena the records and the agents to come into court and testify and prove the letter was received. You can fill out the form at the post office. I think it's worth the money.

You don't have to mail it if you use a process server. You can use a private one or the sheriff. A process server is anyone over 18 who is not a party to the controversy. There are companies who do it professionally. All they do is hand people letters (documents) and complete affidavits to prove it. They can also be used in court to testify to the service.

The men and women dba the "IRS" are shameless when it comes to these pretended "hearings." In my experience, not one person, since they were started in 1998, has EVER filed a timely request, according to the "IRS" that is. What are the odds?

Has anyone ever heard of the "IRS" acknowledging a timely request for hearing?

[Weis]

Well, I've had enough of these jokers. They will not give me an inface hearing at all even after a petition to the District Court just to get one.
So they are doing this one by written correspondence.

Here is my P.S.
P.S. Have you ever realized that this job you have contributes ZERO PERCENT to the advancement of the Arts, Sciences, Trades, and Industry?
Have you ever thought about pursuing an occupation which would make you a productive member in society?
Do you realize that you are advancing one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto and not advancing what America is all about?
Is the reason behind you being hired for this position because you scored high in the anti-social category for any psychological exams the IRS gave you?
Do you get your psychological satisfactions watching people squirm who don’t know what’s really going on and who try to “negotiate” with you about tax problems ?
Were you an anti-social highschool loser who now thinks he has an authoritative position?
Do you really love being in a position where you feel “empowered” to make “determinations”?
Do you realize that your position as an IRS Appeals officer is one Based on Fraud and deception?
Do you like being a fraud and being deceitful?
Are you going to stand before God at the end of your life one day, and all you’ll have to show him that your livelihood was based on Fiction, Fraud, and Deceit?

[Neo]

And they all said amen and amen.

[weishaupt1776]

here's some additions
Have you read the Grace Commission Report under Ronald Reagan which proved that the income tax only pays off the national debt?
Do you realize that the national debt is bolstered by Congress passing 1 Trillion Dollar Bills?
Do you see now that your livelihood is based on extorting capital from people to pay off a national debt on money that is printed up out of thin air with no backing?
Do you now see how meaningless your livelihood really is?
Are you funny lookin’?
If so, is your wife funny lookin’ too?
Did you make funny lookin’ babies together?
Are you teaching your kids to be good little Germans to fall into the goosestep?

[marc stevens]

Weis:

Come on now, you don't really believe there is a legitimate debt do you? ;D

[weis]

a "legal" debt, you mean?

[marc stevens]

"Legal" or otherwise.

[weis]

There is no debt if there is no money.
All there are are politicians' broken promises which most people give value to.