Newland note: This is the text of the reply the IRS sent to Senator Daschle, after Daschle inquired as to why they wouldn't answer my questions. While you can see the syntax problems experienced by Mr. Palmer, you can't see how shoddy the letter itself appeared. It was not the sort of letter you and I would send to a U.S. Senator, if we had any respect for the office.

 

Senator Daschle's office forwarded this letter to me. Be sure you read my response to Senator Daschle's aide (link at bottom of page).

---

 

Internal Revenue Service

Department of the Treasury

 

District Director

316 N Robert St

St Paul MN 55101

 

Person to Contact: Burt Johnson

 

Telephone Number: (612) 222-8755 (voice mail)

 

 

December 15, 1997

 

 

The Honorable Thomas Daschle

United States Senator

816 6th St

PO Box 8168

Rapid City SD 57709

 

Dear Senator Daschle,

 

Thank you for your letter of December 1, 1997 in which you made an inquiry on behalf of your constituent Mr. Robert J. Newland of Hermosa, South Dakota. This letter is a follow-up of our telephone conversation with one of your staff on December 8, 1997. We appreciate your concern in this matter.

 

Since the Freedom of Information Act is intended to produce specific existing documents and does not cover an individual's questions about technical tax law, this response is not being provided under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.

 

The correspondence that we received from Mr. Newland contains the content which we receive from illegal tax protesters. In fact, it is almost identical to the form letters which we routinely receive from protesters who are attempting to frustrate our efforts to administer our voluntary system of taxation. Our experience has found that once we answer the questions it results in yet another series of questions which never ends. The purpose of the questions is to entangle the IRS in a never-ending correspondence debate.

 

We have often found that the originators of these letters are not sincerely interested in finding out the answers but, rather, is [sic] seeking to frustrate our efforts. Consequently, our policy on correspondence of this type is to issue the letter which Mr. Newland received which stated, "This letter and the attachment reflects [sic] our position on the items you address in your letter and we do not feel it is productive to restate this position over and over. Therefore, any further contact regarding these same or similar issues will not be addressed."

 

In terms of Mr. Newland's suggestion that a "fraud of some magnitude or another being perpetrated here". [sic] That statement is without basis. Our mail room erroneously misdirected your constituent's correspondence back to him instead of directing the correspondence to Mr. Johnson. We apologize for any misunderstanding this may have caused. In any event, if Mr. Newland is still pursuing the same line of questioning, we would not make any further response as I've outlined in our policy above. If we can be of any further assistance in this matter, please advise.

 

Sincerely,

(s) Mary Lu Burchard

for Thomas E. Palmer

District Director

---

Go to Newland's reply to Senator Daschle

Go to "Find out about Bob Newland"

Email Bob Newland

Go to Site Directory with

Links to every page in this Site