Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Loyal Buckeye

So a taxpayer should pay taxes after a period has prescribed, but the IRS shouldn’t provide refunds after a period has prescribed. Brilliant scheme! The IRS will want to hire you today!

If the IRS can show fraud, then fine. There is a different statute limitation. I’m not going to say the guy should have to pay taxes rightfully due to the G when the G won’t give me a refund of taxes rightfully due back to me for the same period.

If you want to hand over to the government the power to audit and assess with no statute of limitations, I hope they come knocking on your door first. With taxes, you owe until you can prove you don’t. That’s why there’s such a short statute.

If his *not* paying some tiny bit is such a freaking scandal, it as *more* of a scandal that the Congress allows the IRS to keep taxes they *know* were not due, but for which the statute has run.

You’re worried about some dirty dishes in a sink that’s in a house on fire. Put out the fire, then worry about the dishes.


9 posted on 01/22/2009 3:48:43 PM PST by cizinec
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: cizinec

This is silly.

I never said that the IRS should be able to go back beyond the 3 year statutory period to collect taxes.

The issue is having a Treasury Secretary who intentionally falsified his tax returns. That question is still on the table: Did he, or did he not, understate his taxes? It goes to the man’s integrity.


10 posted on 01/22/2009 7:16:56 PM PST by Loyal Buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson