The Lost Horizons Forum

A meeting place for the CtC-empowered.
It is currently Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:31 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 2:03 pm
Posts: 22
After a long hiatus from the CtC forum over the 2nd half of 2019 and into 2020 I have returned with the results from my appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court.

This appeal was from an adverse determination made against me by the Vermont Department of Taxes following a November 1st, 2018 hearing in appeal of a reassessment for 2016 and denial of refund for 2017 by the VT Dep't of Taxes. I was the first CtC warrior in VT to get a full refund for 2016..

First, I appealed to Superior Court which returned an unfavorable affirmation in support of the commissioner's determination and I then appealed to the Supreme Court, this over the duration of 2019 and into 2020 with the case being decided before a three-justice panel on 1-2-20.

The short of it is.. the three-justice panel in VT Supreme Court also returned a verdict against me. Ironically the whole appeal process starting from the November 1st hearing was conducted as if the federal information was set in stone with the submission of the erroneous w-2 by my previous employer. Even when I was notified on 1-7-19 by the IRS of notice of refund with no tax liability and no taxable income and filed an affidavit as evidence the superior court would not allow its admission (because it was limited to evidence introduced at the 11-1-18 hearing). POINT IS. My Federal 2017 (and 2016) were still being processed by the IRS yet the court and department treated the erroneous W-2 submitted by the employer and as they obtained from the IRS as absolute fact of payments to me of taxable activities under federal law. The DOT made the claim that my filing of the Treasury form 4852, "suggested inaccuracies" and "warranted investigation and treatment as if no return had been filed at all"... and the fuckery began..

At the November 1st hearing, in the Superior court and then again in the Supreme court I argued that W-2 submitted by the employer is not evidence of any taxable income under federal law and thus cannot be under Vermont Law since VT law is imposed on a persons federal taxable income. In the superior court and in the Supreme Court my arguments and citations to Supreme Court rulings and other authorities were completely ignored. In the Supreme Court order the panel asserted that i said, "...the income tax is a direct tax prohibited by the United States Constitution" EVEN though I did NOT say that AT ALL! Furthermore, in both the superior court and in supreme court they claim and contort my argument to make it seem like I'm arguing that "wages" are not taxable as federal income, which as you all know, THEY ARE! Besides the point, I did my best to focus on the LIVE matters at hand as Pete admonishes such as the erroneous w-2 lacking evidence and the first hand sworn testimony as the major prerequisites for refund of overpayment.

Even more so, they go on to reference Pete's work even though I made no reference to him at all in my briefs by saying, "..The commissioner noted that many of the taxpayers arguments, including his constitutional arguments were widely available from various sources, including a book about "cracking" the tax code, and that courts had rejected the arguments as frivolous" (the states Determination provided in the brief to superior court directly referenced Pete and CtC).

I feel as though I've been steamrolled completely. First of all, VT does operate under the "law of the merchant" or mercantile law and treats 3rd party reports as "prima facie" evidence under UCC 1-307 of VT law https://legislature.vermont.gov/statute ... 001/00307.. What significance this has, if any, I'm not sure or maybe it's wholly irrelevant.

On another hand, when I signed the states "Appeal Response Notice" after their original administrative determination and then made my appearance as "taxpayer" James M. Lambert at the November 1st, 2018 hearing it feels like I invoked that magical jurisdiction and all the sudden was acting as surety/trustee. Fellow CtC warrior Bruce Wilder had the same hearing and objected to the "taxpayer" status as soon as it was invoked. What relevance does this have, if any, and what do you guy think given this brief description of my case ?

Also, it's interesting on the top of the entry order from the Supreme Court it says "Decisions of a three-justice panel are not to be considered precedent before any tribunal." This statement was on top of case "scott v. Dep't of Taxes" cited by the state's asst. attorney general in her briefs. What significance, if any, does this have?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group