Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (677644)	10/6/2012 11:45:34 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) of 1577375

>> Not quite so fast goober..... I can assure you, these are rules I'm intimately familiar with. The Tax Court has held that Section 6501(e) applies to sales of goods or services. As you're no doubt aware, tax expert that you are, Romney's returns involved no sales of goods or services, other than his Schedule C fees, which would have undoubtedly been reported on information returns and therefore, would already have been examined if they were going to be and certainly could not have represented a 25% understatement in any circumstances. Of course, there is no statute on fraud -- however, there is obviously no fraud involved here. And the Treasury must show there was fraud involved to even be able to conduct an audit, an exceedingly difficult standard to meet. I've never heard of it. In fact, tax fraud is almost impossible to prove (as distinguished from tax evasion), since fraud requires the demonstration of intent to defraud, which is a pretty tough thing to prove. The statute of limitations is three years. There are no conceivable circumstances in which the older years could still be open to examination.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next