Slashdot Mirror
Legal Sparring Continues in Bitcoin User's Battle with IRS Tax Sweep (fortune.com)
In a strange twist, Coindesk reports that the IRS has, somewhat indirectly, removed one target from its broad request for data about U.S. users of the Bitcoin exchange Coinbase. It no longer wants data about Jeffrey Berns, a lawyer who also happens to be fighting the IRS's "John Doe" request in court. From a report on Fortune: Berns originally filed a motion on December 13th asking the U.S. District Court for Northern California to stop the IRS' subpoena of Coinbase records. The IRS believes that its request, filed in November, is justified because Bitcoin owners "may fail, or may have failed, to comply with one or more provisions of the internal revenue laws." Berns is represented by his own law firm, Berns Weiss, whose motion argues that the IRS data search is "an abuse of process" and "overbroad." Berns has said his motion is intended to defend not only himself, but all targeted users. But according to a December 28th court filing by the IRS, Berns is no longer a target of its records request because he identified himself in his own filing, and the request is only for unidentified users. Therefore, the IRS argues, Berns is not a party to proceedings and his request to block the data grab should be thrown out of court. In response, Berns Weiss had its own spin, telling Coindesk that "The IRS's willingness to withdraw the summons as to Mr. Berns only because it is now aware of his identity," and without the additional information they're seeking about many other Coinbase users, "Makes it clear that the IRS does not have a legitimate purpose in seeking substantial personal and financial information concerning approximately 3 million Americans."
So the IRS's argument is that, as soon as someone identifies themselves by suing them to prevent this release of data, they'll remove that person from the data grab request so they no longer have standing to sue them, and get the case thrown out?
Hey America, there's this concept called 'justice'. You knew about it, once.
"may fail, or may have failed, to comply with one or more provisions of the internal revenue laws."
Excuse me!? First off swap that out with any other situation such as "we need a search warrant to search all of the apartments in a building because one of them may have, or may soon commit a crime" and any judge in the US with their head screwed on straight would laugh it out of court. Secondly even the IRS has I believe admitted that the tax code is so insanely convoluted that not even they can truly define the legal bounds of the tax code. So not only are they asking for sweeping ability to search personal records but they can't even define what laws those people may or may not have run afoul of.
Did you use any infrastructure at all to make money? Like roads? Bridges? Encounter any traffic lights? Did you have workers that needed food? Hospitals? Did your valuable income need protection from someone? Did you have business disputes that you want a judge to reside over? And do you think judges are items you can just buy? Did you want a building for your office that didn't come down in the first week, because inspectors made sure it adhered to the building codes? Did you like the wiring in the building? Did you feel safer, knowing there was a fire brigade in the beighbourhood? And that if you fell ill there was an ambulance nearby? Did you like the fact your employees got an education? Or yourself?
Let's make a deal: you stop paying taxes, and you also stop using anything that was paid for by taxes. I'm fine with that. Have fun in your cave.
Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
[sarcasm]
Let's make a deal: you stop paying taxes, and you also stop using anything that was paid for by taxes. I'm fine with that. Have fun in your cave.
Donald Trump doesn't pay taxes, why should I?
[/sarcasm]
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.