Cryer in Tax Court

A collection of old posts from all forums. No new threads or new posts in old threads allowed. For archive use only.

What results should we expect for Cryer in Tax Court

He raises non-frivolous issues and wins.
1
3%
He raises non-frivolous issues and loses.
5
15%
He raises frivolous issues, but backs down after warnings from the court and settles.
7
21%
He raises frivolous issues, persists, and loses, but is not sanctioned.
4
12%
He raises frivolous issues, persists, loses, and is sanctioned.
17
50%
 
Total votes: 34

Demosthenes
Grand Exalted Keeper of Esoterica
Posts: 5773
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 3:11 pm

Cryer in Tax Court

Post by Demosthenes »

Docket# 008118-09
Tommy K. Cryer
PRO SE Pro Se
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 2 index entries for this case.

No. Date Filings and Proceedings Action/Status Date Served Cer.M Document
0001 04/02/2009 PETITION Filed:Fee Paid
R 04/06/2009

0002 04/02/2009 REQUEST for Place of Trial at New Orleans, LA
R 04/06/2009
Demo.
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by LPC »

So, what kind of petition? A petition to challenge a notice of deficiency, or a petition to challenge an adverse determination from a collection due process hearing?

The former is more likely than the latter, but you can never tell.

I'm looking forward to the demand for a jury trial.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by Famspear »

Oh, fiddlesticks! And I thought all the tax deniers had told me that Cryer's criminal tax acquittal meant that there was no law making him liable for the federal income tax! Yet Cryer is still litigating federal taxes.

Hey, maybe the Internal Revenue Service is just taking some sort of frivolous position.....

:D 8)
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet
Thule
Tragedian of Sovereign Mythology
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 6:57 am
Location: 71 degrees north

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by Thule »

Demo, any chance Red Crayons will be updated with info from the :Brown-case?
Survivor of the Dark Agenda Whistleblower Award, August 2012.
ASITStands
17th Viscount du Voolooh
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:15 pm

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by ASITStands »

LPC wrote:So, what kind of petition? A petition to challenge a notice of deficiency, or a petition to challenge an adverse determination from a collection due process hearing?

The former is more likely than the latter, but you can never tell.

I'm looking forward to the demand for a jury trial.
Generally, a petition to challenge an adverse determination after collection due process has a docket number with the letter "L" following. Docket No. 8118-09L That's not the case here.

On that basis, it would appear this is a petition to challenge a notice of deficiency.

It's called, "Petition for Redetermination of a Deficiency," and the other, "Petition for Lien Action under Code Section 6320(c)" or "Petition for Levy Action under Code Section 6330(c)."

By filing a "Petition for Redetermination of a Deficiency," if he's not ready to prepare a return, the court will adjudicate and establish the amounts in the notice of deficiency.

You can challenge a deficiency by petitioning tax court or filing a return. Those are the only options, as once the IRS has made a determination, it will stand until you make your own.

Just a little common sense for Tommy or any tax deniers reading this thread.

There's no other way around it. If the IRS has determined a deficiency, the only way you can challenge it is to make your own determination by preparing an income tax return.
Demosthenes
Grand Exalted Keeper of Esoterica
Posts: 5773
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 3:11 pm

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by Demosthenes »

Looks like he's disputing Notices of Deficiency for nine tax years...

Ouch.
Demo.
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by LPC »

I've added a poll.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
Cpt Banjo
Fretful leader of the Quat Quartet
Posts: 781
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Usually between the first and twelfth frets

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by Cpt Banjo »

If he raises the same ridiculous arguments he did in his brief in his criminal case, can the government ask for 9 years' worth of sanctions?
"Run get the pitcher, get the baby some beer." Rev. Gary Davis
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by LPC »

The Tax Court is supposed to be implementing a PACER-like system that would allow for public access to pleadings, but we're obviously not there yet.

I was curious enough about a Tax Court petition once to ask the clerk to mail me a copy, for which I paid a fee. I might do the same in this case, but I don't want to do it if Demo or Famspear or someone else is going to do it.

So who's going to get a copy of the petition to share?
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
Demosthenes
Grand Exalted Keeper of Esoterica
Posts: 5773
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 3:11 pm

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by Demosthenes »

LPC wrote:I might do the same in this case, but I don't want to do it if Demo or Famspear or someone else is going to do it.

So who's going to get a copy of the petition to share?
Already in the works.
Demo.
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by LPC »

LPC wrote:The Tax Court is supposed to be implementing a PACER-like system that would allow for public access to pleadings, but we're obviously not there yet.
Correction: Re-reading the relevant press release, it looks to me that on-line access to filings is only for parties and their counsel, and public on-line access will continue to be limited to dockets and opinions.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
ASITStands
17th Viscount du Voolooh
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:15 pm

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by ASITStands »

Demosthenes wrote:
LPC wrote:I might do the same in this case, but I don't want to do it if Demo or Famspear or someone else is going to do it.

So who's going to get a copy of the petition to share?
Already in the works.
What's the rule on privacy in these matters?

Pleadings are available in other cases. I had not known them to be available in tax court.

Interesting. And, yes, I'd like to see the Petition. Wonder if he used one of the Petition Kits. There's an updated kit that provides more opportunity for challenge of law and facts.

The older Petition Kit is a one-pager that leaves a whole lot to the imagination.

I can't make up my mind in the poll. I'm torn between raising non-frivolous issues and losing and raising frivolous issues and backing down, but still losing. It'll probably be a mix.
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by LPC »

ASITStands wrote:What's the rule on privacy in these matters?
Rule 27 protects Social Security numbers, dates of birth, names of minor children, and account numbers on financial accounts.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 4287
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 6:02 am

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by grixit »

Demosthenes wrote:Looks like he's disputing Notices of Deficiency for nine tax years...

Ouch.
That means he faces up to 9 frivpens.
Three cheers for the Lesser Evil!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
ASITStands
17th Viscount du Voolooh
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:15 pm

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by ASITStands »

grixit wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:Looks like he's disputing Notices of Deficiency for nine tax years...

Ouch.
That means he faces up to 9 frivpens.
In tax court proceedings, penalties imposed for frivolous or groundless positions are assigned under IRC § 6673, particularly, subsection (a)(1)(B), and it will be an aggregate sum.

It will not be nine frivolous penalties but one amount consistent with the circumstances.

Often the court takes into account whether it's the first time the Petitioner has made the argument or whether the Petitioner had been warned previously or should have known.

And, the penalty is usually consistent with the amount of deficiency or penalties found under other sections, such as IRC § 6651(a) and IRC § 6654. It might also depend on whether the court finds other penalties for accuracy and fraud under IRC § 6662 and IRC § 6663.

I would expect a sanction under IRC § 6673 in the $15,000+ range. Could be more.
Judge Roy Bean
Judge for the District of Quatloosia
Judge for the District of Quatloosia
Posts: 3704
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 6:04 pm
Location: West of the Pecos

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by Judge Roy Bean »

ASITStands wrote: What's the rule on privacy in these matters?

Pleadings are available in other cases. I had not known them to be available in tax court....
IMHO the issue is redaction of SSANs.
The Honorable Judge Roy Bean
The world is a car and you're a crash-test dummy.
The Devil Makes Three
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by LPC »

ASITStands wrote:Often the court takes into account whether it's the first time the Petitioner has made the argument or whether the Petitioner had been warned previously or should have known.
If Cryer goes into Tax Court with frivolous arguments and presses them without backing down, I think he will be sanctioned because:

1. His arguments will probably rehashes of the same arguments he made in his criminal case to try to get the indictment dismissed, so he's already lost once in court; and

2. He's a lawyer and should know better.

But it's not a sure thing.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
ASITStands
17th Viscount du Voolooh
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:15 pm

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by ASITStands »

I agree with Dan's reasoning.

If Tommy Cryer attempts to make the same arguments made in his criminal case, tax court will consider them frivolous, and though he prevailed against the criminal sanction, it was due to a lack of willfulness and not because his arguments prevailed against the income tax.

He's facing the question of whether he received gross income subject to the tax, whether a deficiency exists in his reporting, or lack thereof, and whether he'll make a candid report.

As stated earlier, if he does not prepare a return now, he'll find that tax court will uphold the determinations in notice of deficiency, and the amounts of liability will be adjudicated.

That's important, because adjudicated amounts are seldom reversible. It's very rare.
ASITStands
17th Viscount du Voolooh
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:15 pm

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by ASITStands »

By the way, Tommy Cryer has an opportunity to avoid the fate of Vernice Kuglin.

Kuglin's tax court case came after assessment and collection due process. The stipulated decision determined how the amounts were going to be collected and/or paid by Vernice.

Tommy Cryer has the opportunity to obtain a much lower assessment by cooperating.
Famspear
Knight Templar of the Sacred Tax
Posts: 7668
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:59 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Cryer in Tax Court

Post by Famspear »

In his criminal case, the U.S. District Court rejected Cryer's fourth motion to dismiss, in which Cryer contended that his income -- which was derived through the practice of law in Louisiana -- was not "taxable income" as defined by the Internal Revenue Code, ruling the contention to be "without merit." So, Cryer might be collaterally estopped from re-arguing that issue in the U.S. Tax Court. Whether he is trying to make that argument in Tax Court, I do not know.

As Demo has ordered copies of the goodies from the Tax Court, I wonder if she knows how long it will take them to arrive (?).
"My greatest fear is that the audience will beat me to the punch line." -- David Mamet