Hoyt Fiasco: $103M Heist + Kevin Brown's
Victim information, evidence, rules of law, IRS viewpoints
|Why did the IRS lead prosecuting attorney in the Hoyt case quit in disgust?|
This letter replies to IRS' attempt to euphemize their misconduct.
March 4, 1999
Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested
Dear Mr. Oveson,
I received a copy of the above-referenced memorandum, a copy of which is attached for your reference. In the first paragraph you state, in part:
This is much more that an allegation. The Commissioner has admitted in writing that his representatives knew Mr. Hoyt was under IRS CID criminal investigations at the time they signed counterparts of the extensions to the statute of limitations for some of the taxable years and for some of the partnerships that are in issue in Phillips v. Commissioner, Docket No 9354-96. A copy of a Second Stipulation of Facts signed by the Commissioners counsel containing those admissions (see Paragraphs 19 and 20) is also attached.
The parties in the Phillipss case have filed a motion under Rule 122 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the United States Tax Court to submit the case for decision on a fully stipulated basis: no trial will be held. We are now waiting for the Court to provide a briefing schedule. I anticipate a decision will be made before the end of the year.
Please call me if you have any questions
Cc w/o encl:
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
Questions, problems? Want to render assistance?
Disclaimer: The facts represented here are as accurate as a reasonable investigation can determine. Mindconnection hosts this site at no charge to the Hoyt victims, to expose this miscarriage of justice.