OFFICIAL RESPONSE from Congresspersons, Senators, IRS, or other...
"Our working equation at the IRS is simple: service plus enforcement equals compliance."
* If you have a letter and response you'd like to share here Contact Us.
Senator Jeff Bingaman:
If Senator Bingaman thinks that "many important questions" were raised, why are they referred to as Frivolous Arguments? Important questions need answers, but maybe these are too important.
Senator Bingaman (or his staff) did not answer a single question, or even mention anything about the missing tax regulations from the official copy on the GPO website or when their website would be fixed [this was pre-2004 regs, but year 2007 is all there. Use HTTrack]. And the document he refers to also does not answer any of the questions. Such documents are not regulations and so are not binding. And, they do not provide the rules for how to determine taxable income.
The United States tax regs prescribe the term "how to determine taxable income" in only one regulation. One of the questions asked of these Congressmen and Senators is - why should we not use the only instructions written for determining taxable income. Unfortunately, Senator Bingaman's response is typical, he doesn't answer questions.
Senator Pete Domenici:
IRS RESPONSE (via Senator Domenici)
We received this response from the Acting-Acting Field Director of Accounts Management, in Philadelphia. [Since she is the Acting-Acting Director, the employee turnover rate at the IRS must be high.]
[Our comments are placed in brackets, and blue.]
Congresswoman Heather Wilson:
Thank you, Senators and Congresspeople, but we've already written to IRS Commissioner Mark Everson. He is even a CC recipient to the letters we sent you, as shown under the CC heading.
Service seems to be missing (and so does their mission of "helping them understand"), but compliance is certain. Answers cannot be obtained from the IRS, Congressmen, Senators, or the Government Printing Office. Apparently, no government official is responsible or cares about rules and what the rules say.
Interestingly, we did find the following speech by Congressman John J. Duncan Jr. of Tennessee on June 19. 2001. Now missing from http://www.house.gov/duncan/2002/speeches/speech061901.htm
The speech was removed from Duncan's website. So we linked to the Google cache of the same webpage, and then Google removed it within two days. It was here. Google also removed their Find-pages-that-link-to-the-page page, when there were quite a few other sites that linked to Duncan's speech.
Fortunately, Duncan's speech was made before congress,
and so can be found here:
However, here is what Congressman J. Duncan said:
As late as 2003, it was not possible to download a complete copy of tax regulations from the Government Printing Office website. Although the GPO was notified, for years, that many regulations were missing from each year's edition, the problem was eventually solved, at least on our end, by utilizing sections from different years to compile our Repaired Edition.
This is now no longer an issue, since the 2004 regs were eventually fixed by the GPO, and since the GPO produced the eCFR website.
> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 6:42:08
> Sent: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:57:12 -0800 (PST)
Broken links on Title 26 CFR 2004:
Every link under 1.1-1.60
> Sent: 11/27/2004 09:16 AM
> Sent: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 10:58:10 -0800 (PST)
> Sent: 12/11/2004 12:11 AM
-- In particular, for this year, 2004, Title 26 CFR Sec. 1.1 through
1.60 have broken links (file
-- Part 31, Sec. 6011(a)-10 is not available for any year on the GPO
Access website, except on the
-- Also, Part 500-599 is incorrectly linked for 2003 and 2004, while
2001 and 2002 are linked to
Emails regarding this have already been sent to firstname.lastname@example.org, but with no response.
Please... can you indicate if this can be fixed, and when?
> Sent: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:51:55 -0800 (PST)
Hi GPO Access User Support Team,
And, it would be helpful if you could set up the CFR search function
to quit ignoring "stop" words like "how" and "to",
etc. Can you just get rid of stop words completely? It is preventing
complete searches from being made of the US tax rules. Your website
needs and advanced search function. Most search engines have one. Can't
we get one on the US tax regulations, too?
> Sent: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 10:44:13 -0800 (PST)
GPO Access User Support Team,
I've written several times to the Government Printing Office support team asking for help with missing files and broken links in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 26, Internal Revenue.
I'd like to do research online, but I find that every year available online of the officially published editions of CFR Title 26 is incomplete. Could someone run a link checker and a search for "File not found" pages?
Currently (as of Jan. 30, 2005), none of the official online editions of the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 26, are complete.
-- In particular, for this year, 2004, Title 26 CFR Sec. 1.1 through 1.60 have broken links (file not found errors) for each section.
-- Part 31, Sec. 6011(a)-10 is not available for any year on the GPO Access website, except on the unofficial beta website, the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations.
-- Also, Part 500-599 is incorrectly linked for 2003 and 2004, while 2001 and 2002 are linked to year 2000 regulations. So, the most currect regs available for Part 500-599 are from the year 2000.
Is there somewhere else I should write to for these repairs to the CFR?
Example of a letter sent to Congressmen, Senators, and the IRS Commissioner:
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Senator Edward Kennedy
Dear Senator Kennedy,
As a fellow American I am asking for your help. I've found critical issues that present a major problem for all of us. The GPO mission statement is to "Keep America Informed", and the IRS mission statement is "helping them understand," but neither is followed. So, I turn to you.
The critical issues are:
1) If a person downloads the tax rules, 26 CFR, and searches through every instruction on "taxable income", "excluded income", etc, they show that only "Foreign earned income" is taxable for a US citizen. Seriously - the tax regs are conflicting with current practices. Please notice:
-- "how to determine taxable income" (found
in 1 file)
and any similar term. No matter what term is used to find taxable income, the regulations show that only foreign earned income is taxable income for a US citizen. Their instructions are unmistakable, specific, and primarily exist in just one section of 26 CFR, even simple instructions, such as "how to determine tax" (1 file found) Sec. 861.
Any computer science student can confirm, have one check; the 'Code' is like any other code. If there is a tax on items earned by a citizen inside the United States, it truly doesn't show in the CFR, according to simple text data mining. Anyone who seeks a "deduction" (1634 files), or their "taxable income" (817 files), or "exempt income" (65 files), can see their income is not on the list of taxable items, or specific sources. Coincidently, 1040 instructions only require "you must report...income...from...outside the United States", but not "inside." Confirm this with the 1040 instructions in PDF format and Adobe's built-in search function.
2) Many income tax regulations are missing. The Government Printing Office website that has the officially published Code of Federal Regulations, http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html, is incomplete with broken links and missing files for every year of tax regs they have published. It is quite an accomplishment for a citizen to compile a usable edition of 26 CFR. I've written email@example.com numerous times to make them aware of the problem. Can we please have the US tax regulations website repaired (and easier to download)? We should be able to read the rules we are expected to follow. I would be glad to provide a detailed list of broken links and missing files.
3) Should I use 26 CFR, Sec. 861 to determine taxable income? When I search the CFR I find plenty of results telling me "how to determine tax" and nearly all are found in Sec. 861. Even the cross-references and the index point me to 861. Questions:
A) Is Sec. 861 to be used in determining my tax? I have income from inside and outside the US.
B) If I should not use Sec. 861, in what section is it written who should, and who should not use Sec. 861?
C) Sec. 61(b), says "more common items... are... excluded from gross income entirely", and if another section provides specific treatment of any item, "such other... shall apply." What about 861, and what common items are excluded entirely?
D) The term "excluded income" exists in only 7 files in 26 CFR - among millions of words. A simple search confirms there is only one list of "Income that is not... exempt". Great, there should be just one list, which tells us 'what is taxed', but why is the income of the average American not on the list [Sec. 861-8T(d)(2)(iii)]? The scope of Sec. 861-8 says this is the place, and the law dictionaries say, if a list does not include something, it has been excluded - "expressio unius est exclusio alterius."
E) Yes, form 1040 instructions only require that "you must report... income... from... outside the United States", but not "inside". Why is income inside the US not required in our 1040 tax form instructions? Did the editor forget? For 90 years?
F) Older tax regulations said that neither income exempted by statute nor income exempted by "fundamental law" were subject to the tax (Sec. 39.21-1 (1956)), and said that other types of income were excluded because they were, "under the Constitution, not taxable by the Federal Government" (Sec. 39.22(b)-1 (1956)). What income "under the Constitution" is this?
G) Even older regulations said, "ART. 71. What excluded from gross income. --Gross income excludes the items of income specifically exempted by the statute and also certain other kinds of income by statute or fundamental law free from tax. Such tax-free income should not be included in the return of income and need not be mentioned in the return, unless information regarding it is specifically called for... See article 402. The exclusion of such income should not be confused with the reduction of taxable income by the application of allowable deductions. See section 212 of the statute and article 21." (ART. 71, Regulations No. 45 (1918)). What income is exempted by fundamental law and need not be mentioned in a return? Where is fundamental law regarding income tax and their regs written?
Specifically, both the old and current tax regulations, and even 1040 instructions directly contradict IRS activity. And all the online editions of the tax regulations are still incomplete. Since all results point to Sec. 861, how can I get answers to these questions from an authority at the IRS using specific citations in tax regulations? I'm really not interested in court rulings or bulletins, please, just citations from the tax rulebook we have already been provided by the Government, and a plausible answer for questions D and E.
I thank you in advance for your time.
CC: Mark W. Everson, IRS Commissioner, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20224
All data mining research contained herein is Copyright © 2001-2011 Zolt [at] Whatistaxed.com. Permission is hereby granted for all use, Copyleft © 2001-2011 Zolt [at] Whatistaxed.com. Many logos and images are owned by others and protected by copyright and/or trademark. We believe their use qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law.