Attorney-at-Law

“I OWE TOO MUCH MONEY” – PART DEUX

In Uncategorized on 01/06/2017 at 23:10

It Won’t Play in Peoria

John E. Rogers, Docket No. 27208-15L, filed 1/6/17, has provided me lots of blogfodder. In this designated hitter from The Judge With a Heart, STJ Armen, Mr Rogers is battling IRS about a NFTL for chops galore arising out of his DADS deals.

For Mr Rogers’s history, see Order, at pp. 1-2, footnote 2. For a schedule of chops, see Order, at pp. 5-6.

IRS concedes Mr Rogers can’t pay the chops themselves, so he gets CNC.

But he wants the liens lifted. And he went to Appeals in Peoria, IL, from which he was tossed. So he petitions.

There’s also a stack of penalties pending in Chicago, Il. Mr Rogers fought those, tooth and nail.

In the meantime, the Peoria liens stand.

Mr Rogers tries to re-fight the chops in his petition, but he had a full chance to fight at Appeals in Chicago.

His Eighth Amendment arguments fail, as the precedents show that the chops are fractions of the tax owed, and are not excessive.

“In the instant case, petitioner essentially relies on section 6323(j)(1)(C), which provides that the Secretary may withdraw a NFTL if the Secretary determines that withdrawal will facilitate the collection of the tax liability. In that regard, petitioner argues that ‘[t]he lien precludes petitioner from engaging funding necessary to finance his businesses going forward and earning the money necessary to satisfy the lien, earn a living in his profession, and provide for his retirement and medical care.’ But this argument is not meaningfully different from those rejected by the Court…, nor does the argument acknowledge that withdrawal of the NFTL would compromise the lien priority interests of the United States vis-a-vis petitioner’s other creditors, both present and future. Further, petitioner’s argument ignores the fact that a lien, which is a security device that assures the United States of its priority over other possible creditors, does not deprive a taxpayer of property, unlike a levy.” Order, at p. 21. (Citations omitted).

But this Order and Decision affects only Peoria. As to Chicago Appeals, Mr Rogers can carry out his stated intention that “…he will proceed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.” Order, at p. 11.

I confidently expect more blogfodder.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: