Attorney-at-Law

EH BIEN, VOILA AU MOINS QUI N’EST PAS BANAL – DEUXIEME

In Uncategorized on 10/11/2018 at 12:01

Please Pardon High School French

We old-time beaten-up, beaten-down, single-shingle, “general practitioner(s) of limited experience and mediocre qualifications” have seen clients play the games people play, and then some. Games undreamt-of by the late Eric Berne and unknown to anyone’s philosophy frequently swim into our bleary-eyed ken.

But today we have a new one on me so again I quote the taxi dispatcher of the Marne, General Joseph Simon Galieni. It’s sort of son-of-The-Scarlet-Letter; see my blogpost thus entitled 10/13/15, but this one is even more adventurous.

Ryan M. Richardson & Kathryn M. Richardson, Docket No. 15436-18, filed 10/11/18, seem to have timely petitioned a SNOD arising from alleged involvement in something called Clean Energy Systems, LLC. And said SNOD, dated 5/9/18, is properly attached to their petition.

So why does IRS move to dismiss?

Ch J Maurice B (“Mighty Mo”) Foley will tell us what IRS is telling him.

“…Among other things, attached to respondent’s motion to dismiss are: (1) as Exhibit A, a postmarked Substitute PS Form 3877, reflecting that January 31, 2018, deficiency notices for 2015 was sent by certified mail to petitioners at their last known address…on January 31, 2018; (2) as Exhibit B, tracking information obtained from the U.S. Postal Service showing those deficiency notices were delivered…on February 7, 2018, and (3) as Exhibit C, copies of those January 31, 2018, deficiency notices issued to petitioner for 2015, showing the last day for filing a timely Tax Court petition as to those notices would expire on May 1, 2018.” Order, at p. 1.

Except Ryan & Kathryn didn’t file their petition until 8/7/18.

Wait a minute, were there two SNODs for the same year?

IRS says “no way.” Here’s what IRS “reasonably believes.” Note that’s IRS talking, not Ch J Mighty Mo.

“…Respondent notes that the notice of deficiency attached [as Exhibit A] to the petition contains different dates on its first page. That notice of deficiency states that it was issued on May 9, 2018, and that the last day to file a petition with the Court is August 7, 2018. Respondent has determined that this page has been altered, presumably in a bid to secure the jurisdiction of this Court. * * *

“…Respondent reasonably believes that the dates used in the alteration were copied from a notice of deficiency issued to different taxpayers. That notice of deficiency is the basis for the Court’s jurisdiction in Leto v. Commissioner, Docket No. 15167-18, a case that was timely filed. Like petitioners, the taxpayers in the Leto case are purported investors in Clean Energy Systems, LLC.” Order, at p. 2.

Both the Leto petitioners and Ryan & Kathryn are self-representeds. And the same IRS counsel is assigned to both Leto and Ryan & Kathryn. I haven’t yet blogged Leto because IRS filed its answer in that case last week, and nothing has happened.

But Ch J Mighty Mo wants something to happen here.

Let Ryan & Kathryn tell him whether they ever got a SNOD back in February, and how come they got the May SNOD.

If they can’t tell a good story, they’ll get tossed. Although Ch J Mighty Mo is not prejudging anything, this might go beyond their getting tossed, maybe so.

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: