At
http://www.taxes-in-usa.v901.net/1564 under UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff v. CAREL A. PRATER, et al., Defendants. Docket: 8:02-cv-2052-T-23 MSS , Filed August 19, 2003 there is mention of Barry G. Lusk as being a client of Prater who was a proponent of the 861 argument.
15. On January 10, 2003, the IRS received a letter dated December 31, 2002,
and postmarked January 8, 2003, from individual taxpayer Barry G. Lusk.
(Dkt. 57 Hr`g Ex. 3.) This letter was written in response to an appointment
notice issued by the IRS and purported to challenge the IRS` authority to
tax Mr. Lusk`s income. (Id.) Enclosed with this letter were a set of
"Administrative Interrogatories" requesting that the IRS produce several
categories of documents and information in support of its authority to tax
Mr. Lusk. (Id.)
16. On February 25, 2003, the IRS received a letter dated February 20, 2003,
and bearing a Tax Escape letterhead that included Defendant Prater`s name.
(Dkt. 57 Hr`g Ex. 4.) This letter was purportedly signed by Mr. Lusk and his
wife, Mrs. Kelly Lusk, and again challenged the IRS` authority to tax their
income based upon the section 861 Argument. (Id.)
17. On January 15, 2003, the IRS` processing center in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania received a Form 1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return for Mr.
and Mrs. Lusk dated January 8, 2003. (Dkt. 57 Hr`g Ex. 5.) The face of the
Form 1040 was conspicuously stamped "NOT LIABLE IRS LETTER 112c." (Id.)
Enclosed with the Form 1040 was a letter dated December 27, 2002, and signed
by Mr. and Mrs. Lusk. (Id.) This letter challenged the IRS` authority to tax
the Lusks` joint income and requested an appropriate refund based upon an
assumption of no income tax liability. (Id.) On the basis of the Form 1040
and accompanying documentation, the IRS refunded the Lusks $38,000.00 in
income tax. (Dkt. 62 at 27:4-7.)
“Where there is an income tax, the just man will pay more and the unjust less on the same amount of income.” — Plato
