Scott Patriot

800 EastviewRoad

Evansville, NC  28888

 

 

 

January 17, 2006

 

Internal Revenue Service

General Appeals Program

600 E Main Street, Suite 1600

Richmond, VA 23219

 

Ref.:  AP:FE:A4:RIC:ATM; your letter dated January 5, 2005 (attached)

 

Dear A. T. Munson:

 

I received your letter dated January 5, 2005 that was in response to my letter in reference to my CDP Hearing request.

 

In response to your letters, I do not wish to have a telephone conference nor do I wish to discuss this matter via correspondence since the majority of my questions over the years pertaining to this matter have gone unanswered.

 

What I am requesting is a face to face meeting as prescribed by law, Section 6330 (b) (1) states: (b) right to a fair hearing (1) In general if the person requests a hearing under subsection (a) (3) (B), such hearing shall be held by the Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals.

 

Nowhere in Section 6330 is there a provision for a telephone conference or discussion via the U. S. Mail. It is very clear that “such hearing shall be held by the Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals” means just that. So I will reiterate my demand for a right to a fair hearing as prescribed by law.

 

In one letter you state “Appeals does not provide a face-to-face conference if the only items you wish to discuss are those mentioned above.”  Since no specific items are mentioned I cannot ascertain exactly what items you deem frivolous or groundless. Nowhere in my CDPH request do I recall ever mentioning and moral, religious, constitutional, or conscientious grounds. I recall asking that you present at the hearing verification from the Secretary that the requirements of any applicable law or administrative procedure have been met as stated in Section 6330 (c) (1). Is this a frivolous item?  Ref: Section 6330 (c) (1) (c) Matters considered at hearing. In the case of any hearing conducted under this section – (1) Requirement of investigation. The appeals officer shall at the hearing obtain verification from the Secretary that the requirements of any applicable law or administrative procedure be met.

 

The fact is that the only items that I mention in my CDP Hearing request are documents and procedures which are outlined in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) and Internal Revenue Manual.   

 

At the hearing, which for the fourth time I am requesting, I intend to raise any relevant issue relating to the unpaid tax or the proposed levy, including – challenges to the appropriateness of collection actions; and offers of collection alternatives as set forth in Section 6330 (c) (2).  (2) Issues at hearing (A) In general. The person may raise at the hearing any relevant issue relating to the unpaid tax or the proposed levy, including – (i) appropriate spousal defenses; (ii) challenges to the appropriateness of collection actions; and (iii) offers of collection alternatives, which may include the posting of a bond, the substitution of other assets, an installment agreement, or an offer-in-compromise.

 

In addition, Section 6330 (b) (3) states: (3) Impartial officer. The hearing under this subsection shall be conducted by an officer or employee who has had no prior involvement with respect to the unpaid tax specified in subsection (a) (3) (A) before  the first hearing under this section or section 6320. A taxpayer may waive the requirement of this paragraph. I do not waive the requirement of this paragraph.

 

Considering your letter which contends that I have brought up in my CDP Hearing request are frivolous or groundless, even though not one specific item is actually mentioned, and the fact that I have had no hearing on this matter to date, I can only conclude that you are not impartial and have made up your mind concerning this matter.

 

This being the case, I am requesting that you remove yourself from this case and turn it over to another appeals officer who has no involvement whatsoever with this case as stipulated above in Section 6330 (b) (3).

 

Please have the new appeals officer contact me in writing with the time and place where we can meet for my CDP Hearing as set forth in Sections 6320 and 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code.

 

Further to your request that I “file the delinquent tax returns from 1999 to 2004 and complete Form 433-A” enclosed in your letter.  I respectfully decline to comply with this request for two reasons: (1) you failed to state the relevant law that would require me to file and/or complete such returns and forms, and (2) this appears to be an ex parte request for private and personal information. Also, the U.S. Congress has no precondition to filing Form 1040 or provide an Offer in Compromise prior to any CDP Hearing.

 

With this letter I am not waiving any of my due process rights. If there is a technical breech regarding this request, please notify me and continue with my Collection Due Process Hearing, or refer me to the next proper authority who can grant my request.

 

At the hearing I will bring a tape recorder(s) and/or court reporter, a representative and one or more witnesses (Ref: IRC Section 7521).  Please contact security and make arrangements for me to bring my tape recorder(s), etc., through the security check point.  Please schedule the CDP Hearing in Evansville, North Carolina and notify me of date, time and place. I have checked with the Evansville IRS office, and they assure me that they conduct CDP Hearings in their office.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

            Scott Patriot

            800 Eastview Road

            Evansville, NC 28888

 

Enclosures:     AP:FE:A4:RIC:ATM  dated January 5, 2006 (2 pages)

                        Case Record ……..  (1 page)