Important executive order regarding taxes that no one is talking about

[dude58677]

https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13789

Tax regulatory reform which eliminates tax regulations that exceed statutory authority and doesn't promote economic growth.

Irwin Schiff may as well signed this executive order.


Of course I'm going to get nonsense replies from Sunny Tufts and Zippyjuan. They would try to convince us that Hillary won.

[timosman]

150 days from this order passed on September 18, 2017 - https://www.convertunits.com/dates/150/daysfrom/Apr+21,+2017

[Weston White]

....Peter Schiff has not spoken to it either--he is not blatantly anti-Trump is he?

[milgram]

Schiff voted for Trump but he's been fairly critical of him

[devil21]

What, exactly, is so special about it? It orders the SecTreas to prepare a report. It's a nice step but doesn't have teeth since only Congress can amend the Internal Revenue Code.

[dude58677]

It is saying that the IRS can't enforce tax laws that limit economic growth. Requiring someone to pay taxes would certainly hurt economic growth. Would it not?

[Origanalist]

150 days from this order passed on September 18, 2017 - https://www.convertunits.com/dates/150/daysfrom/Apr+21,+2017

Where's muh report?

[Origanalist]

Section 3. General Provisions.

(a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.//

[dude58677]

//

It repeals IRS REGULATIONS that EXCEED the internal revenue code.

[Origanalist]

It repeals IRS REGULATIONS that EXCEED the internal revenue code.

Ok, great, which ones has it repealed?

[specsaregood]

Ok, great, which ones has it repealed?

Stop thinking so one-dimensionally.

[Origanalist]

I know, it's a curse.

[euphemia]

Hopefully optimistic.

[dean.engelhardt]

It is saying that the IRS can't enforce tax laws that limit economic growth. Requiring someone to pay taxes would certainly hurt economic growth. Would it not?

Don't all tax laws limit economic growth?

[Sonny Tufts]

https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13789

Tax regulatory reform which eliminates tax regulations that exceed statutory authority and doesn't promote economic growth.

Irwin Schiff may as well signed this executive order.


Of course I'm going to get nonsense replies from Sunny Tufts and Zippyjuan. They would try to convince us that Hillary won.

This is old news, and you don't know squat about my opinion of Hillary (hint: it's lower than a snake's belly).

On July 7, 2017 the IRS identified eight regulations that in its opinion met at least one of the first two criteria set out in the order (the IRS would never admit that any of its regs met the third criterion -- i.e., that they exceeded the Service's statutory authority). Among the regs identified by the IRS were proposed regulations under IRC §2704, dealing with valuation issues in the gift and estate tax area. These proposed regs had been severely criticized by the estate planning community in hearings last December as vague, beyond the IRS's regulatory authority, and having the effect of overturning long-standing rules on valuing closely-held business interests.

Fortunately, the IRS withdrew these proposed regulations two days ago. While the executive order probably hastened the demise of the regs, the criticism from the estate planning community that had been leveled before the executive order was issued had already had an effect, as the IRS had announced that the estate planners had misconstrued the proposed regs and that the Service would seek to clarify them.

As I do a lot of estate planning work, I was overjoyed to see the proposed regs vanish.

[dude58677]

This is old news, and you don't know squat about my opinion of Hillary (hint: it's lower than a snake's belly).

On July 7, 2017 the IRS identified eight regulations that in its opinion met at least one of the first two criteria set out in the order (the IRS would never admit that any of its regs met the third criterion -- i.e., that they exceeded the Service's statutory authority). Among the regs identified by the IRS were proposed regulations under IRC §2704, dealing with valuation issues in the gift and estate tax area. These proposed regs had been severely criticized by the estate planning community in hearings last December as vague, beyond the IRS's regulatory authority, and having the effect of overturning long-standing rules on valuing closely-held business interests.

Fortunately, the IRS withdrew these proposed regulations two days ago. While the executive order probably hastened the demise of the regs, the criticism from the estate planning community that had been leveled before the executive order was issued had already had an effect, as the IRS had announced that the estate planners had misconstrued the proposed regs and that the Service would seek to clarify them.

As I do a lot of estate planning work, I was overjoyed to see the proposed regs vanish.

The deep state doesn't comply with the third part of the order.

[dude58677]

Don't all tax laws limit economic growth?

Yes, that is why the executive order is making taxes voluntary because if it isnt it hurts econonic growth which goes against the order. This has ti be Donald Trumps intention because he doesnt want to hurt the people in his company that he still owns and hasnt given up which is Trump Organization
The only problem is that the deep state IRS is not fully complying as Sonny Tufts has stated.

[Weston White]

On July 7, 2017 the IRS identified eight regulations that in its opinion met at least one of the first two criteria set out in the order (the IRS would never admit that any of its regs met the third criterion -- i.e., that they exceeded the Service's statutory authority).

The entire FRP program operates outside of both the CFR and USC; Trump's admin needs to have the entire Ogden, UT branch dismantled and those employees retired out or fired, they are each and all the taint of the IRS.

[Superfluous Man]

What are some examples of tax regulations that exceed statutory authority?

[Sonny Tufts]

The entire FRP program operates outside of both the CFR and USC; Trump's admin needs to have the entire Ogden, UT branch dismantled and those employees retired out or fired, they are each and all the taint of the IRS.

IRC §6702 not only imposes penalties for frivolous returns and positions, it specifically authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe a list of frivolous positions. There is plenty of statutory support for the frivolous return program.

[Sonny Tufts]

What are some examples of tax regulations that exceed statutory authority?

The proposed §2704 regs arguably did. For a summary of this complex area, see http://www.willamette.com/insights_journal/16/winter_2016_2.pdf

Some regulations that exceed statutory authority are actually taxpayer-friendly, so nobody complains. One I come across from time to time are the regs under §338(h)(10) that allow an acquisition of stock in an S corporation to be treated as an asset purchase for tax purposes (the advantage here is that the buyer gets a cost basis in the corporation's assets thereby allowing future depreciation and amortization deductions). But there's nothing in the language of the statute that addresses this situation.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Of course I'm going to get nonsense replies from Sunny Tufts and Zippyjuan. They would try to convince us that Hillary won.


... you don't know squat about my opinion of Hillary (hint: it's lower than a snake's belly).






LOL at Sonny Tufts playing Zip's games. Guessing both them voted for Obama, and at least one of them supported Sanders.

[Superfluous Man]

LOL at Sonny Tufts playing Zip's games. Guessing both them voted for Obama, and at least one of them supported Sanders.

What games are you talking about here?

What about this executive order is supposed to be a big deal?

Do you disagree with something Sonny has said in this thread?

[Weston White]

IRC §6702 not only imposes penalties for frivolous returns and positions, it specifically authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe a list of frivolous positions. There is plenty of statutory support for the frivolous return program.

And the statute is being grossly misapplied--the definition of what is frivolous and what is exempted from the context of it--and the regulations are not being followed for individual filers. It has become an abusive scheme by inept IRS employees and tax-"pro" idiots.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

What games are you talking about here?

What about this executive order is supposed to be a big deal?

Do you disagree with something Sonny has said in this thread?



https://orig00.deviantart.net/b5bd/f/2011/145/7/4/retard_duck_by_tecnuli-d3h748m.png

[Superfluous Man]

https://orig00.deviantart.net/b5bd/f/2011/145/7/4/retard_duck_by_tecnuli-d3h748m.png

I honestly have no idea what that means.

[Sonny Tufts]

LOL at Sonny Tufts playing Zip's games. Guessing both them voted for Obama, and at least one of them supported Sanders.

As usual, you haven't a clue.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I honestly have no idea what that means.


https://pics.me.me/ican-count-to-potato-memess-com-17948974.png

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

As usual, you haven't a clue.

Well, why don't you fill me in, captain?

[Superfluous Man]

https://pics.me.me/ican-count-to-potato-memess-com-17948974.png

Is it safe to say, then, that you and dude58677 can't really come up with anything remarkable about this executive order to show why it's so important and like something that Irwin Schiff would have signed?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Is it safe to say, then, that you and dude58677 can't really come up with anything remarkable about this executive order to show why it's so important and like something that Irwin Schiff would have signed?


It's safe to say that I'm sure not listening to Sonny Tufts.