Proposed Comments

[TheEngineer]

PPA is working on talking points for us to use for our sumbitted comments. They are reviewing the regs in D.C. and are formulating a response. They hope to have these points posted early next week.

It's far more important to get these right than it is to get something out fast. We have until Dec. 12, and there is no bonus for being first.

[TheEngineer]

Online commenting for UIGEA is now available. Instructions are at: https://pokerplayersalliance.org:443...le.php?DID=293

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
PPA is working on talking points for us to use for our sumbitted comments. They are reviewing the regs in D.C. and are formulating a response. They hope to have these points posted early next week.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds good. Just curious, and I know I've mentioned this several times, but will they just post this call for action or reach out to members by email or something. I'd guess < 5% of members will see the web site post but > 80% will see an email request for action.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
PPA is working on talking points for us to use for our sumbitted comments. They are reviewing the regs in D.C. and are formulating a response. They hope to have these points posted early next week.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds good. Just curious, and I know I've mentioned this several times, but will they just post this call for action or reach out to members by email or something. I'd guess < 5% of members will see the web site post but > 80% will see an email request for action.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's an email coming in the next couple of weeks.

[Jimbo]

[ QUOTE ]
Ban please an obvious troll.


[/ QUOTE ]

I am addressing your rude response in order to help you better form your thoughts. A simple answer will suffice, it is obvious to anyone with a modicum of legal knowledge that you are spouting off about a subject you know nothing about.

You also never replied when I pointed out your incorrect statement about Federal Regulations not having the force of law which they do 100% of the time.

If anyone should be banned it would be you because even in your vain attemps to be helpful you disseminate such poor and innacurate information and state it as gospel.

Please finish college first before delving into complex subjects or at least do some simple research.

Jimbo

[JPFisher55]

IRS regulations are routinely overturned as contrary to the IRC by the Tax Court and Federal District Courts. In fact, the IRS unsuccessfully tries the same case over its regulations multiple times, such as hobby v. business in commercial fishing. Even EPA regulations are overturned as outside their power provided by statute or not adequate to satisfy statutory requirements. Most agencies must adopt regulations within the scope the statutes that established the agency or conform to the laws that the agency enforces.
SEC regulations have the power of law because the original enabling statutes passed in 1933 and 1934 gave them the power to make regulations with the power of laws.
If you went to law school which I doubt; ask for a refund of your tuition.

[Jimbo]

[ QUOTE ]
IRS regulations are routinely overturned as contrary to the IRC by the Tax Court and Federal District Courts. In fact, the IRS unsuccessfully tries the same case over its regulations multiple times, such as hobby v. business in commercial fishing. Even EPA regulations are overturned as outside their power provided by statute or not adequate to satisfy statutory requirements. Most agencies must adopt regulations within the scope the statutes that established the agency or conform to the laws that the agency enforces.
SEC regulations have the power of law because the original enabling statutes passed in 1933 and 1934 gave them the power to make regulations with the power of laws.
If you went to law school which I doubt; ask for a refund of your tuition.

[/ QUOTE ]

An IRS regulation by defintion cannot be overturned unless it is deemed to be unconstitutional by a Federal court. Most, if not all, IRS disputes are handled by tax courts. Again an IRS regulation is never overturned, it has the force of law. Rulings and specific procedures are ocassionally but not often overturned.

Again I suggest you do more research other than from a Wiki. Just to make you feel a bit better the hobby v. business in commercial fishing that was successfully challenged was a procedure, not a regulation.

Jimbo

[JPFisher55]

I am going to try one more time. An IRS ruling is just a letter opinion that states an IRS opinion on what the law is on a issue. What you are calling procedures (I assume that you do not mean internal IRS audit procedures) are regulations. A section of the Internal Revenue Code IRC is a statute not a regulation. Each such section has numerous IRS regulations that govern how the IRS enforces and interprets it. These regulations do not have the power of law. They must conform to the law as interpreted by a federal court. A long time ago, my family successfully challenged, before the US Supreme Court, an IRS regulation that held that a family business insuring the lives of debtors to another family business was not an insurance company.
Yes, the Tax Court governs most tax disputes because the taxpayer does not have to pay the tax that the IRS says he owes to contest the matter in Tax Court. But the federal district courts decide lots of IRS cases. The taxpayer must pay the disputed tax into the federal district court and sue for a refund. Lots of taxpayers use this method to avoid additional penalty and interest if they should lose.
The commercial fishing hobby v. business deductability of loss is one example of an IRS regulation that has been overturned many times. But the IRS still maintains that its position on this issue is correct. In fact, the IRS lost a case in which it ruled that playing poker was a hobby and not a business.
The truth is that the IRS routinely enforces regulations that they know are not likley to win in court to settle for a small percentage of what they claim the taxpayer owed. This happened to me.
A section of the IRC must be ruled unconstitutional to be overturned. I am not aware of this occuring despite many attempts. All IRS regulations and procedures must conform to the IRC as interpreted by a court of law.
The regulations proposed by the Treasury and DOJ governing the UIGEA must conform to the UIGEA as interpreted by a court of law. If these regulations are adopted and if the UIGEA is not amended or repealed, which I think will happen and make sooner than you think, then I predict lots of litigation over the UIGEA and its regulations.
Some regulations in the Federal Code of Regulations have the status of laws but most do not and can be challenged in court on the grounds that they are an incorrect interpretation of statute. Even the FDA could not adopt a regulation making cigarettes controlled substances.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
I am going to try one more time. The regulations proposed by the Treasury and DOJ governing the UIGEA must conform to the UIGEA as interpreted by a court of law. If these regulations are adopted and if the UIGEA is not amended or repealed, which I think will happen and make sooner than you think, then I predict lots of litigation over the UIGEA and its regulations.
Some regulations in the Federal Code of Regulations have the status of laws but most do not and can be challenged in court on the grounds that they are an incorrect interpretation of statute.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you!

It seems at least one person here knows you don't have to sit up and beg just because some idiot in DC manages to write some "rule" down somewhere!

We as US citizens have the right some would claim the duty to challenge any action of the goverment we think is wrong and even more so if it violates the Consitution.

We can speak out or roll over and take it in the ____.



D$D<--not built that way.

[JPFisher55]

D$D, avoid the SEC. Their regulations do have the force of law and they do not lose very often in court. But the SEC does not affect many people. I have a good friend who is a stock broker. He takes NASDAQ and SEC very seriously indeed. If the SEC was involved in the online gambling fight, then I would be very concerned.