The United States Versus Loren C. Troescher
E-mail the address for this victory over the IRS to a
friend
Write to Karl Loren -- he will answer
From
a time long ago when Karl was in a different business, he
took on the IRS and won one of the largest victories in
the history of the IRS. Karl went on from this
business to return to full time in research and
publishing on health issues. The information in
this section is generally all that Karl offers to the
public. If you call with questions, he will
politely tell you that he doesn't discuss these issues
any longer, that he has retired out of the business that
got the IRS attention.
A national newspaper has written: "This is the most important pro-people court decision in the history of the IRS." Note that this web site features "Karl Loren," and that "Karl Loren" is the professional name for "Loren C. Troescher." Thus, this landmark court victory over the IRS was accomplished by "Troescher" who is also the same person as is the author of this web site: "Karl Loren." You can read more about Karl's background on this web site.
Click Here to see the actual final Court Case
Click Here to see the original Court Case Compelling Testimony
Click Here to see the Actual Appellate Court Decision
Click Here to see an analysis of the Court Case
Click Here to see the Background of this Case
Click Here to see a National Newspaper Story about this Case
Corrections to the Newspaper Story About the Case.
This note is published here on April 14, 1998, one day before TAX DAY. The IRS had appealed the decision of the Lower Court -- The Federal Court. Click here for some of the documents related to that appeal. At this stage in the process there is not much information. The IRS, apparently, wanted to attack the method and timing of the Fifth Amendment claim. This will be interesting because the IRS used this same argument in the lower Federal Court, and got criticized by the Judge for not understanding the Fifth Amendment. The 9th Circuit heard that same argument on the original Appeal, from the IRS, but choose to NOT speak to that issue. Now, the IRS, apparently, wants to continue to assert its "understanding" of how and when the Fifth Amendment can be claimed. A victory here, for me, would put the IRS position into a terrible situation, from their viewpoint, and would be a tremendous victory for taxpayers. A loss here would greatly undermine the rights of citizens of the United States. The issues are huge, but the stage is tiny and hidden.
Here is a modern marvel:
|
|
We The People Foundation For
Constitutional Education, Inc.
2458 Ridge Road, Queensbury, NY 12804
Phone: (518) 656-3578 Fax: (518) 656-9724
www.givemeliberty.org
info@givemeliberty.org
January 30,
2005
Contact: Bob Schulz
For Immediate
Release
(518) 656-3578
U.S. Court of Appeals Rules IRS Cannot Apply Force
Against a Tax Payer Without A Court Order
Taxpayers Free To Ignore An IRS Summons
Queensbury, NY – On January 25, 2005, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that taxpayers cannot be compelled
by the IRS to turn over personal and private property to the IRS, absent a
federal court order.
Quoting from the decision (Schulz v. IRS, case number 04-0196-cv),
“...absent an effort to seek enforcement through a federal court, IRS summonses
apply no force to taxpayers, and no consequence whatever can befall a taxpayer
who refuses, ignores, or otherwise does not comply with an IRS summons until
that summons is backed by a federal court order…[a taxpayer] cannot be held in
contempt, arrested, detained, or otherwise punished for refusing to comply with
the original IRS summons, no matter the taxpayer's reasons, or lack of reasons
for so refusing.”
Without declaring those provisions of the Code
unconstitutional on their face, the court, in effect, nullified key enforcement
provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, stripping the IRS of much of its power
to compel compliance with its administrative demands for personal and private
property. The court characterized IRS summonses issued under Section 7602 as
mere “requests.”
The court went on to say that the federal courts are there to protect taxpayers
from an “overreaching” IRS, and that the IRS must go through the federal courts
before force can be applied on anyone by the IRS to turn over personal and
private property to the IRS.
In addition, the Court held, in effect, that
the enforcement language of Section 7604 of the Internal Revenue Code is
unconstitutional. In plain language, Section 7604 directs federal District
Court judges to issue orders, merely upon a request by the IRS, for the
immediate arrest and incarceration of a tax payer “for contempt” for not
complying with the demands of an IRS administrative summons/request.
Prior to the 2nd Circuit’s recent landmark decision, the common
practice of compliant federal judges was to issue such orders, often without an
evidentiary hearing or allowing the taxpayer, in an Article III Federal Court,
to challenge IRS claims before being subjected to formal enforcement proceedings
(liens, levies, wage garnishments, searches, property seizures, etc.). The
result has been widespread and egregious abuse of its lawful authority by the
IRS, and substantial injury to millions of tax payers.
- more -
“Does the Court’s decision mean that companies do not have to turn over a
worker’s paycheck to the IRS simply because the IRS demanded it, and banks do
not have to turn over to the IRS the contents of someone’s bank account merely
because the IRS requested it?,” asked Bob Schulz, the plaintiff in the case, and
the Chairman of the We The People Foundation for Constitutional Education, Inc.
Schulz asked, “Does this mean that at least in the 2nd Circuit, no individual, no third party (such as an employer or a bank) need worry about being threatened and intimidated by the IRS for refusing to comply with an IRS demand for personal and private property? Isn’t the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals stating, in clear language, that without an Article III Federal Court order, the IRS cannot apply force against a tax payer?
“We would agree, the use of force by the IRS against the person or property of any tax payer without an evidentiary hearing and formal order issued by an Article III Federal Court, is a direct violation of the Privacy and Due Process clauses of the United States Constitution. It appears that the IRS has now been put on notice – they are not above the law.”
In 2003, Schulz, was served several IRS
summonses ordering him to produce his books and records. Schulz, as plaintiff,
immediately challenged the IRS in District Court on constitutional grounds,
claiming that the summonses were issued without any bona fide authority
in law and with the sole, deliberate intent to harass and intimidate as a result
of the Foundation's high-profile activism questioning the lawful authority of
the IRS to impose a direct, un-apportioned tax on labor.
Despite the clear language of an IRS summons which states, “You are hereby
summoned and required...” and the threatening language of the federal tax
statute at 26 USC 7604 (which governs enforcement of IRS summons), the 2nd
Circuit Court of Appeals has effectively ruled that the language of the Internal
Revenue Code, and the administrative and enforcement practices of the IRS and
DOJ, must comply with the strict Due Process requirements of the United
States Constitution, and that the IRS will not be allowed to continue its
practice of serving summonses upon average tax payers with the intent of
intimidating them into compliance.
Naturally, this Appellate decision directly leads to further questions regarding IRS's other day-to-day administrative practices where substantial constitutional “injuries” are, in fact, inflicted routinely upon citizens and businesses in the form of liens, levies, salary garnishments, property seizures, etc. -- all of which are administrative, agency actions taken without any judicial review or court order.
The 2nd Circuit’s decision also
carries profound implications regarding the Foundation’s historic
Right-to-Petition Lawsuit now underway in the D.C. Federal District. (We The
People, et al v. The United States, et al., Civ. No.
04-0211)
The IRS and DOJ, as defendants in the RTP lawsuit, have recently filed motions
asserting that the government has “no obligation” to “listen to” or “respond to”
the People’s First Amendment Petitions regarding the unlawful administrative and
enforcement practices and the systemic abuse of power by the IRS and DOJ.
(more)
The 2nd Circuit’s recent decision could potentially have a powerful
positive effect on the RTP lawsuit, and the People’s historic struggle to hold
the IRS and our government leaders at every level, accountable to the law.
The Court’s decision in the Schulz case is an
historic and courageous first step in restoring constitutional order to the
administration and enforcement of our nation’s tax laws, and effectively puts
the IRS and DOJ on notice that violations of tax payer’s Due Process rights will
no longer be tolerated.
To read the Second Circuit’s decision, go to
www.GiveMeLiberty.org/rtplawsuit/courtfilings/2ndCirc-Decision-Jan-05.pdf
To learn about the Right-to-Petition lawsuit and read the RTP legal research, go
to:
www.GiveMeLiberty.org/rtplawsuit/InfoCenter.htm
The Foundation’s website is :
www.GiveMeLiberty.org
