Embezzlement – Page 3

February 10, 2021August 25, 2024

FTB’s 8 Schemes To Overcharge Taxpayers

For those that prefer video, here is a 12-minute speech that I made to State Controller Betty Yee via webinar in December 2020, which sums up the info below. We’re also working on a documentary series exposing the corruption.

The over-simplified explanation of the schemes that I got ensnared in is that the Franchise Tax Board does not apply the money that you send them to your account right away. Then they charge you penalties for “paying late.” Then they over-charge interest on these penalties.

But you have to understand that the reason that they’ve been getting away with their criminal activities is because tax law is complicated, and they work the complex nature of the laws to deceive the public on what the laws actually say.

February 10, 2021December 22, 2022

My Rebuttal to FTB’s Response to My 2020 Annual Taxpayer Bill of Rights Request

Here is FTB’s Response to my 2020 Annual Taxpayer Bill of Rights Requests. Here is the rebuttal that I wrote in which I detail the following:

The Interim Taxpayer Rights Advocate, Chris Smith, committed multiple counts of collusion to cover up criminal activity by misrepresenting what the law says about FTB’s practices of withholding estimated tax payments from the taxpayer’s account .

September 4, 2020December 22, 2022

CA Supreme Court Accusation Filed Against Franchise Tax Board Employee for Covering Up That FTB is Overcharging Taxpayers

I have caught California’s income tax agency, the Franchise Tax Board (FTB), running multiple schemes where they embezzle taxpayer’s money, then impose penalties which would not had been imposed had the money not been embezzled. The false imposition of fees is the crime of racketeering. I’ve also caught them overcharging interest.

I have filed an Accusation in the California Supreme Court in which I detail how the schemes work, show the relevant legal codes that proves they are illegal, and then detail how FTB falsely makes these unlawful practices appear to be legitimate. I also call out the administrative court judges at the Office of Tax Appeals, as well as the California Bar Association, for their roles in covering up the criminal activities.

August 26, 2020December 22, 2022

CA Supreme Court Accusation Filed Against Franchise Tax Board Employee for Covering Up FTB’S Criminal Activities: Embezzling Estimated Tax Payments, Racketeering Taxpayers & Overcharging Interest

I have filed an Accusation with the California Supreme Court against Eric Yadao, who is employed by the Franchise Tax Board as an attorney (part 1, part 2).

An Accusation is basically a request to revoke Mr. Yadao’s license to practice law because of unethical and/or unlawful behavior.

In this Accusation, I clearly detail that FTB is running multiple embezzlement and racketeering schemes, and that they are also overcharging interest. On pages 5 – 20, I detailed how the schemes work. On pages 4 – 16, I listed the legal codes that these schemes violate and why. On pages 23 – 38, I showed exactly how Mr. Yadao covered up FTB’s unlawful activities via improper redactions, improper omissions, false arguments and false statements..

February 17, 2020December 22, 2022

Summary of FTB Crimes and Update on My Efforts To Stop Them

Summary: I have been trying to get the Franchise Tax Board to end some blatantly illegal business practices. The basics are:

1. The FTB is illegally putting your estimated tax payments into a general slush fund instead of into your account. The money isn’t put into your account until you file your return for that year; basically, the State of CA is temporarily embezzling your money. If you file late, they harass you for payments that would not be owed/impose penalties that would not have been assessed had the money been applied to your account in accordance with the law.

February 17, 2020December 22, 2022

Rebuttal to FTB’s Response to My Annual Taxpayer Bill of Rights Request

FTB’s response to the 13 policy change requests that I made is short, terse and riddled with problems.

Item 1: End Policy of withholding estimated tax payments made via credit elects

FTB wrote: The Franchise Tax Board previously addressed this issue in the 2018 Taxpayer Bill of Rights response to you, dated January 25, 2019.

Rebuttal: In my written submission, I clearly detailed how they had committed one count of collusion to cover up racketeering by misrepresenting what the law said in Commissioner V Lundy. I also re-sent them a copy of the 2018 letter to Governor Brown in which I cited several more times that the FTB committed the crime of collusion to cover up racketeering on this topic. In this response, FTB did not dispute my interpretation of the assorted laws they falsely cited, nor offer any valid laws.

February 17, 2020December 22, 2022

I Have Filed Suit Against FTB in Superior Court of CA!

I lost my Office of Tax Appeal case. While I was disappointed, I was not surprised. Two different attorneys had told me that the OTA almost always sides with the FTB and that hiring an attorney would probably be a waste of money. That is why I originally went with the free attorney from the TAAP program. However, as soon as the TAAP program was moved from the Department of Fee and Tax Administration to the FTB, TAAP withdrew representation. What a surprise. So, I represented myself for the rest of the case.

The OTA verdict that was so blatantly corrupt that it was shocking. I just could not let the FTB/OTA get away with their criminal activities. The OTA is an administrative court, and Californians have the right to appeal administrative court rulings in Superior Court of CA. I went lawyer shopping and found that it would cost a minimum of $30,000 to get my $15,000 in penalties, fees and interest back. The lawyers I spoke with also told me that the FTB is retaliatory and will deliberately run up attorney costs with unnecessary extra legal work. And since I have pissed off the FTB in a big way, it would likely cost me as much as $100,000.

So I decided to act as my own attorney. Here is the brief. In my humble opinion, it is really good. It clearly lays out the FTB’s three racketeering schemes, as well as the unethical and underhanded tactics that the OTA uses to cover up FTB’s criminal activities. I am SO PROUD of myself!!!!! 🙂

I have forwarded this brief to the FBI, CA Auditors office, the FTB’s Board of Directors, Governor Newsom, GovOps, and everyone on the Senate and Assembly Tax Committees . Hopefully, it gets some traction.

February 16, 2020December 22, 2022

Written Submission for the FTB’s 2019 Annual Taxpayers Bill of Rights Meeting

2019 Annual Taxpayer Bill of Rights Requests

1. End the policy of withholding estimated tax payments made via credit elects.

This policy violates R&TC 19363, which says “Any amount paid as estimated tax for any taxable year shall be deemed to have been paid on the last day prescribed for filing the return for the taxable year (determined without regard to any extension of time for filing the return),” which in simple English means that no matter what date you filed the previous year’s return, the credit elect payment must be credited on tax day, which is usually April 15 or 16.

However, the FTB does not apply these payments in accordance with the law; instead, the FTB puts the credit elect money into “suspense,” which is a fancy word for the general slush fund. The credit elect money does not get moved from the slush fund until the taxpayer files that year’s return. The FTB claims this policy is in line with federal practices, but that is a lie; the IRS does not withhold payments made via credit elects.

February 1, 2020December 22, 2022

Video of Speech I Made to State Controller Betty Yee on Dec. 3, 2019

FTB Meeting Dec 2019 – Christi Section

State Controller Betty Yee is the Chair of the Franchise Tax Board’s Board of Directors. She is the woman on the stage who calls me to the podium before I speak, and thanks me at the end of my speech. The women seated at the table with her are (from left to right): Gayle Miller, who was there on behalf of Keely Bosler, who is the Director of the Department of Finance and the second FTB Board Member, Yvette Stowers, who is Betty Yee’s Deputy that normally attends the meetings in lieu of Betty, and Malia Cohen, who was at the time Chairman of the Board of Equalization and the third Board Member.

At the FTB table on the other side of the state are (from left to right): Dawn Casey, who works in the legal department; Shane Hofeling; Jozel Brunett, who is Chief, Legal Counsel; Selvi Stanislaus, who is Executive Officer; and Susan Maples, who Taxpayer Advocate. Notice that the FTB waived their right to offer a rebuttal/response to my speech — not denying what I said to be true is a tacit admission of guilt.

The text of my speech is here. Please note that the speech had a time limit, thus was shorter and less detailed than the written submission that I provided prior to the speech. The written submission is here. The video of the entire FTB meeting is here.

December 4, 2019December 22, 2022

Text of Speech I Made at the 2019 Annual Taxpayer Bill of Rights Meeting on December 3, 2019

My name is Christine Grab. I have 13 requests.

1. End the Policy of Withholding Estimated Tax Payments Made Via Credit Elects Until the Taxpayer Files a Return.

This policy violates R&TC 19363, which in simple English says that no matter what date you filed the previous year’s return, the credit elect payment must be applied on tax day, which is usually April 15th.

The FTB does not apply these payments in accordance with the law. Instead, the FTB puts the credit elect money into “suspense,” which is a fancy word for the general slush fund. The credit elect money does not get moved from the slush fund until the taxpayer files that year’s return. The FTB claims this policy is in line with federal practices, but that is a lie; the IRS does not withhold payments made via credit elects.

Demand Notices are only sent to taxpayers whom the FTB believes have underpaid their tax liability. The accompanying Demand Penalty is a crippling 25% of extra additional taxes beyond what the taxpayer actually owed.

By withholding the credit elect payment, it appears that the account was underfunded and thus a Demand Penalty is assessed. However, had the credit elect payment been applied in accordance with the law, the account would not have been underfunded and the Demand Penalties would not have been imposed.