[BACK to My Work][Come visit my homepage.]
Questions or comments?: 
9. I now have a paper trail showing that FTB could not sustain its stated position or its claims, even while claiming to rely upon the afore-referenced false information:
FTB withdrew its claim for 'tax year 1996' after my oral hearing (97A-1336) before the State Board of Equalization. See your own records.
FTB withdrew its claim for 'tax year 1998' after my oral hearing (NPA 02929427) at the FTB office on Power Inn Road, Sacramento, California. See your own records.
I reasonably infer from FTB's issuance of a "CONFIRMATION LETTER" (Exhibit 12, attached and incorporated in full herein) after having repeatedly failed/refused to grant me an oral hearing, rather than the required NOTICE OF ACTION, and from "INC Application Note 2002-04-02" (Exhibit 13, p. 4): "... MEANWHILE, NPA HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN ..." that FTB has already abandoned its claim for 'tax year 1999'.
I reasonably infer that said paper trail demonstrates that FTB has already admitted three times that FTB's stated position was frivolous (i.e., lacking any legal merit).
10.a. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, based upon the information set out above, I believe that FTB and/or persons purporting to work for FTB have perpetrated identity theft as defined in West's Ann.Cal.Civ. Code (2002), § 530.5(a) (in part) and (b):
(a) Every person who willfully obtains personal identifying information, as defined in subdivision (b), of another person, and uses that information for any unlawful purpose, including to obtain, or attempt to obtain, credit, goods, services, or medical information in the name of the other person without the consent of that person, is guilty of a public offense....10.b. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that should said actions continue uninvestigated or uncorrected for 30 days after the date of FTB's receipt of this Notice, FTB may be subject to the penalties codified as West's Ann.Cal.Civ. Code (2002), § 1798.93(c)(6):
(b) "Personal identifying information" as used in this section, means the name, address, telephone number, driver's license number, social security number, place of employment, employee identification number, mother's maiden name, demand deposit account number, savings account number, or credit card number of an individual person.
(c) A person who proves that he or she is a victim of identity theft, as defined in Section 530.5 of the Penal Code, as to a particular claim, shall be entitled to a judgment providing all of the following, as appropriate:10.c. DEMAND IS MADE that FTB investigate this possible identity theft against me by FTB and/or FTB's purported employees/agents/actors.
...
(6) A civil penalty, in addition to other damages, of up to thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) if the victim establishes by clear and convincing evidence all of the following.
(A) That at least 30 days prior to filing an action or within the cross-complaint pursuant to this section, he or she provided written notice to the claimant at the address designated by the claimant for complaints relating to credit reporting issues that a situation of identity theft might exist and explaining the basis for that belief.
(B) That the claimant failed to diligently investigate the victim's notification of a possible identity theft.
(C) That the claimant continued to pursue its claim against the victim after the claimant was presented with facts that were later held to entitle the victim to a judgment pursuant to this section.
11. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN AND DEMAND MADE that I demand that FTB immediately remove ALL false information about me which it maintains in its records; that FTB, when it has done so, make Notice to me and to all persons with which it shares information; and that FTB timely provide to me true copies of its record(s) as corrected.
12.a. May 24, 2002, I removed from the mailbox which I rent from U.S.P.S. a Letter, dated May 22, 2002, from a "Donald R. Brown" accompanying "INC Application Note" printouts (hereafter INC) (Exhibit 13, attached and incorporated in full herein) and "FTPROD (PIT 5062) COMMENTS INPUT SCREEN" (Exhibit 13) which purport to be FTB's response to my second I.P.A. request, dated April 8, 2002.
12.b. In my second I.P.A. Request, I specifically requested (in part):
3.b. This request covers the time period July 1, 2001, to March 28, 2002, inclusive.12.c. From FTB's disclosure (Exhibit 13), I reasonably infer that FTB, through "Donald R. Brown", has failed/refused to provide the information I requested for the INC screen printouts for 2001; specifically those printouts covering the period from July 1, 2001, to December 11, 2001.
...
3.d. In clarification of the above request:
...
4. I request a legible paper printout of EVERY (EVERY also includes ALL "Comment" and "Note" screens) computer screen created or maintained concerning this "case" throughout the designated time period.
12.d. INC 2001-12-18 09:44:18 [text in lower left block] (Exhibit 13, p. 1) reads: "RCVD ITP CORSP. RE 99NPA. TP PROTEST W/ ITP RESP. NPA IN PROTEST STAT. SENT 4744A."
12.e. INC 2002-03-19 13:17:20 [lower left block] (Exhibit 13, p. 2) reads (in part): "REC'D ITP CORR,TY99,DATED 1/25/02. ... NO PROTEST OR HEARING REQ."
12.f. INC 2002-03-26 07:42:51 [lower left block] (Exhibit 13, p. 3) reads: "ACCOUNT SENT FOR HEARING ON 99TY TO SACRAMENTO D.O. PER REGAN ROSELLI HEARING OFFICER, CANCLD 99FE. ALL INFO REF TO ITP FOLDER.".
12.g. INC 2002-04-02 11:46:37 [lower left block] (Exhibit 13, p. 4) reads (in part): "... MEANWHILE, NPA HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. RTE CORR. TO ITP FOLDER."
12.h. FTPROD (PIT062) COMMENTS INPUT SCREEN (Exhibit 13, p. 5) reads (in part):
"RCVD ITP PROTEST RE 99NPA. SENT 4744A. 12/18/01 765MLF"
"REC'D ITP CORR, TY99, DATED 1/25/02. APPEARS TO BE AN APPEAL TO 03/19/02 765CYW"
"BOE, LISTING SEVERAL TP, RE TY 99 FE.CITES VARIOUS SECTION,__03/19/02 765CYW"
NO PROTEST NOR HEARING REQ.-----03/19/02 765CYW"
"CANCLD 99FE PER HEARING OFFICER. SEE INC.___________" 03/26/02 765MLF"
12.i. It is a fact that "Donald R. Brown" failed/refused to deliver to me the contents of the IPT FOLDER.
12.j. To the extent that FTB interprets "ITP" to mean "illegal tax protester" or FTB relies upon such information from IRS, I reasonably infer that FTB is also barred from using the designator "illegal tax protester" after January 1, 1999 (see 5.c.(1) above).
13.a. My private file on this matter (I do not have a business, so have no business books or records), contains originals of U.S.P.S. CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTs and the corresponding Domestic Return Receipts (Exhibit 14, photocopies attached and incorporated in full herein) which show that FTB's correspondence logs (Exhibit 13) are also erroneous:
(1) FTB, or someone picking up FTB's mail, acknowledged receipt of my letter entitled "Request for Discovery", dated November 6, 2001, CERTIFIED MAIL # 7001 1940 0000 6650 8179, by the mechanical-impression signature of one "[Clasa[?]/Clara[?]/Claea[?]] Jewell" on [illegible] NOV 2001.
(2) FTB, or someone picking up FTB's mail, acknowledged receipt of my letter entitled "Notice of Protest and Protest; Notice of Request for Hearing and Request for Hearing; Notice of Claim and Claim.", dated November 20, 2001, CERTIFIED MAIL # 7001 1940 0000 6650 8162 by the mechanical-impression signature of one "[Clasa[?]/Clara[?]/Claea[?]] Jewell" on 26 NOV 2001.
(3) FTB, or someone picking up FTB's mail, acknowledged receipt of my letter entitled "Statement of Thomas Murrell Thornhill III In Opposition to FTB LETTER EC 01-00099713", dated January 25, 2002, CERTIFIED MAIL # 7001 1940 0000 6652 3295 by the mechanical-impression signature of one "[Clasa[?]/Clara[?]/Claea[?]] Jewell" on 28[?] JAN 2002.
13.b. Comparison between the USPS documents (Exhibit 14) and FTB's disclosed record(s) (Exhibit 13) reveals discrepancies between the times when U.S.P.S. proves that FTB received my letters and when FTB admits to receiving said letters.
(1) FTB, or someone picking up FTB's mail, signed for my "Request for Discovery" on [illegible] NOV 2001, but FTB's disclosed records do not seem to recognize its receipt at all.
(2) FTB, or someone picking up FTB's mail, signed for my "Notice of Protest and Protest; Notice of Request for Hearing and Request for Hearing; Notice of Claim and Claim." on 26 NOV 2001, but whoever identifies him/herself as "765MLF" admits to receiving it 12/18/01, a discrepancy of approximately 17 business (omitting holidays) and 23 calendar days (Exhibit 16, Old Farmer's Almanac calendar 2002-2002, attached and incorporated in full herein).
(3) FTB, or someone picking up FTB's mail, signed for my "Statement of Thomas Murrell Thornhill III In Opposition to FTB LETTER EC 01-00099713" on 28[?] JAN 2002, but whoever identifies him/herself as "765CYW" admits to receiving it 03/19/02, a discrepancy of approximately 37 business (omitting holidays) and 50 calendar days (Exhibit 16).
13.c. I cannot explain the lag times involved in FTB's processing of my letters; I object to such practices as being unreasonably and discourteously tardy.
FTB's webpage: "GTAM: Responding to Taxpayer Communication" ( http://www.ftb.ca.gov/manuals/audit/gtam/GTAM9300.htm [as of October 23, 2001] ) (Exhibit 18 attached and incorporated in full herein) reads (in part):
It is the Department's practice to respond to a taxpayer's correspondence within 21 days of receipt. ... It does, however, include a response to statements made or questions asked by the taxpayer in correspondence....14.a. FTB's webpage "GTAM Taxpayers' Bill of Rights - Action on Protests" ( http://www.ftb.ca.gov/manuals/audit/gtam/GTAM16230.htm [as of May 30, 2002] ) (Exhibit 15, attached and incorporated herein in full) reads (in part, emphasis added):
...the department has established a 33 month or less time frame in which the merits of a protest (and any included claims for refund) are evaluated, a hearing conducted (if requested), and a notice of action issued.14.b. I reasonably infer that said policy, after being reviewed in April, 2001, would still have been in effect in, and after, July, 2001.
This time frame begins on the date the taxpayer files a protest of the NPA, and expires on the date the Notice of Action is issued.
...
Action must be taken on every protest. ... the taxpayer is still entitled to full protest rights. All protests are acted upon by the issuance of a Notice of Action....
Reviewed: April 2001
14.c. I accept FTB's admission of violation of said stated policy: "Action must be taken on every protest. ... the taxpayer is still entitled to full protest rights. All protests are acted upon by the issuance of a Notice of Action...." by its failure/refusal to date to issue a NOTICE OF ACTION and by FTB's disclosure of the statement: "NO PROTEST OR HEARING REQ." (Exhibit 13, p. 2).
15.a. FTB's webpage "GTAM: Notice of Action (NOA) on Protests" ( http://www.ftb.ca.gov/manuals/audit/gtam/GTAM16240.htm [as of May 30, 2002] ) (Exhibit 16, attached and incorporated herein in full) reads (in part, emphasis added):
All protests must be acted on by affirming, revising, or withdrawing the NPA. Prior to any action, the hearing officer must send a letter to the taxpayer explaining the reasons for the action being taken....15.b. I reasonably infer that said policy, after being reviewed in April, 2001, still would have been in effect in, and after, July, 2001.
An NOA will be issued on every NPA, which the taxpayer has formally protested.
Reviewed: April 2001
15.c. It is a fact that I filed my formal Protest on 26 NOV 2001. See item 13.a.(2) above.
15.c. It is a fact that, to date, I have not received any letter from any person identifying him/herself as a FTB hearing officer explaining the reasons for the action taken in this matter.
15.d. I accept second FTB's admission from 2002-04-02 11:46:37 [lower left block]: "... MEANWHILE, NPA HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. ..." (Exhibit 13, p. 4).
15.e. I accept FTB's admission of violation of said stated policy: "Prior to any action, the hearing officer must send a letter to the taxpayer explaining the reasons for the action being taken." by FTB's disclosure of the statement: "PER REGAN ROSELLI HEARING OFFICER, CANCLD 99FE." (Exhibit 13, p. 3) on, or before, "2002-03-26" without writing any letter to me.
16.a. I know of no valid reason why FTB has chosen to ignore the statements/Protests/letters of those it has seemingly arbitrarily designated as "illegal tax protester"/"ITP"/"TP"/"nonfiler".
16.b. I reasonably infer that FTB uses the various designators "illegal tax protester"/"ITP"/"TP"/"nonfiler" to arbitrarily ignore/bypass/short-circuit its own stated policies and procedures (items 14.a. and 15.a. above), California Statutes as-codified, and California Regulations to the detriment of those persons so designated.
16.c. I reasonably infer that such a policy violates the "equal protection of the laws" provisions of the Constitution for the United States and is unfairly discriminatory against people FTB has labelled "illegal tax protester"/"ITP"/"TP"/"nonfiler".
16.d. I reasonably infer, from the information that I have presented to FTB in my prior letters for "tax year 1999', that such a pattern of behavior also violates FTB's implicit obligations of fair play and good faith to its customers in its self-admitted "business" practices and its obligations of Due Process under the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California.
17. This remains a timely (within the 33-month window set by FTB) inquiry into the nature of my relationship with FTB and is pursued to exhaust my administrative remedies.
I Certify within the laws of the State of California and of the United States of America that the foregoing is true, correct, and complete.
Dated: ________________________________________
At: ___________________________________________
Signed: _______________________________________
Attachments:
Exhibit 1: My Request, already in FTB's possession.
Exhibit 2: Photocopy of U.S.P.S. CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT and the corresponding Domestic Return Receipt, 1 p.
Exhibit 3: "Paul Brainin"'s letter, 2 pp.
Exhibit 4: "Notice of Applicable California law concerning the licensing of an attorney.", 7 pp.
Exhibit 5: IRS webpage "Internal Revenue Service, the Digital Daily, IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, 3707...", 1 p.
Exhibit 6: Statement of Principles of Tax Administration, 1 p.
Exhibit 7: "A Consumer's Guide to the California Department of Consumer Affairs' Bureau of Security & Investigative Services", 3 pp.
Exhibit 8: "Search Results for Security Guard", 1 p.
Exhibit 9: "Member Records Online", 1 p.
Exhibit 10: Search result, 1 p.
Exhibit 11: FTB Notice dated February 22, 2002, 2 pp.
Exhibit 12: FTB "CONFIRMATION LETTER", 1 p.
Exhibit 13: FTB Response to second IPA; "INC Application Note" printouts, 4 pp.; "FTPROD (PIT 5062) COMMENTS INPUT SCREEN", 1 p.
Exhibit 14: Photocopies of U.S.P.S. CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTs and the corresponding Domestic Return Receipts, 3 pp.
Exhibit 15: "GTAM Taxpayers' Bill of Rights - Action on Protests", 1 p.
Exhibit 16: "GTAM: Notice of Action (NOA) on Protests" 1 p.
Exhibit 17: Old Farmer's Almanac calendar 2000-2002, 1 p.
Exhibit 18: "GTAM: Responding to Taxpayer Communications", 1 p.
Exhibit 19: "Franchise Tax Board - LEGAL RULING 076", 1 p.
[BACK to My Work][Come visit my homepage.]
Questions or comments?: