My 2025 Annual Taxpayer Bill of Rights Speech Where I Called Out The State’s Off-the-Books Spending Account, How they Unlawfully Fund It, and Asked Employees to Stop Complying

This was the speech that I intended to make at the Annual Taxpayer Bill of Rights Meeting. The text, with links to evidence, is at the bottom of the post. The speech is only an overview, a detailed explanation is here.

Background: The Franchise Tax Board is required by law to take suggestions from the public on how to improve policy and procedures, as well as to take suggestions on changes in tax law, at the Annual Taxpayer Bill of Rights hearing. The hearing is usually incorporated in the December Board of Directors meeting as an agenda item.

You can make suggestions in writing or verbally. Written requests go to: FTBAdvocate@ftb.ca.gov and must be submitted prior to the meeting beginning. FTB sometimes unlawfully rejects suggestions made in writing, so it’s a good idea to speak at the meeting so they can’t reject your request. Directions on how to participate verbally are posted 10-days before the meeting. However, the speeches have a time limit and the written texts do not have a limit, so most people do both: they submit a detailed written request and give an oral overview at the meeting.

Back in 2017, when I first started participating in the hearings, they allowed 8-minutes to speak. One time, they even let me speak for 11-minutes. But over the last few years, they have limited the speeches to 5-minutes.

Current Issue: At this year’s meeting, with no notice whatsoever, they reduced the allotted speaking time to 3-minutes. Prior to the speeches beginning, I complained about shortening the time with no prior notice being a violation of our Taxpayer Rights. State Controller Malia Cohen disregarded me.

During the speeches, they let the first speaker continue on for 4-minutes, 45 seconds, then asked her questions to get more information. But they told me to stop right at the 3-minute mark. When I complained that the other lady got to speak for 5-minutes, they cut me off.

The written request that I submitted for 2025 is very long and detailed. It gets into the weeds of how FTB violates the tax codes and has links to evidence, including from my court case against FTB. If you have any questions about the speech, please consult the written request for more details. I also was able to make two public comments that help explain the details, as well.

Below is the text of the full speech that I’d intended to give, and has links to more information.

My name is Christine Grab and I have 7 requests. 

1. Per TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242, Color of Law, it is a federal felony to misrepresent the contents of a law or to say that something is a law when it isn’t. I request that FTB protect their staff from federal prosecution by requiring all staff to cite verbatim every statute and regulation when asked. Employees: If the words of a particular statue or regulation does not match FTB’s policies or procedures, you are required by law to follow the written version. If you choose to follow FTB’s version, you could be federally prosecuted. If there is not a statute or regulation number, it is not a legally sanctioned business practice and subject to prosecution. FTB cannot fire you for protecting yourself. 

2. FTB has stated that estimated tax payments are immediately identified as revenue and turned over to the State Controller. FTB has also stated that some estimated tax payments are not immediately applied to the taxpayer’s account; these payments are held in suspense until the taxpayer files that year’s return.

In Grab v FTB, FTB’s records stated the payments held in suspense were identified as “no payments.” The only purpose I can think of to identify a payment as a “no payment” is to not count those funds as revenue. There were accounting irregularities with our withheld payments, making it appear that these funds were utilized for something. During Discovery, I asked FTB for more information about these irregularities. Chelsea Hubbard stated under penalty of perjury that FTB does not keep accurate records. 

I request that FTB provide full disclosure about this “no payment suspense account,” including who, when, where, why and how these funds can be utilized. This is the fourth year I have asked. It appears to be an off-the-books spending account. 

3. Please Disclose exactly when tax payments are applied to the taxpayer’s account

This is the fourth year I’ve asked. FTB’s previous responses were evasive and deceptive. It appears that FTB delays applying payments to help fund its off-the-books-spending account. 

4. In 2022 and 2023, I asked FTB to disclose the guidelines for determining which payments and portions of payments are included in the totals collected for the purpose of calculating interest. I asked because in Grab v FTB, it was disclosed that FTB only recognized some of the payments that we’d made and only portions of other payments. Thus, we’d paid interest because it falsely appeared we had an outstanding liability. FTB’s responses were evasive. I asked again last year and FTB responded that it credits all payments made after the due date. My wish is for FTB to disclose the guidelines for timely payments.

5. Revenue and Tax Code 19087 states that NPAs can only be issued on accounts that have an outstanding tax liability. FTB withholds some payments from NPA totals. Last year, I requested the legal codes which justify not crediting all payments. I believe that Ms. Jones violated TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242 by misrepresenting the contents of an irrelevant tax code and irrelevant Notice. I believe that Ms. Jones committed this fraud because NPAs are the lynchpin of FTB’s racketeering scheme, and she was covering up FTB’s crimes. 

FTB also does not allow Protests of NPAs on the grounds that some payments were not credited. Last year, I requested the legal codes to justify this denial of taxpayer rights. Ms. Jones failed to address it. 

6. The IRS treats married couples as one tax entity from the moment the couple notifies them of marriage until the couple notifies them that the status has changed. FTB does not follow this precedent. I asked FTB to conform to IRS guidelines. The advocates stated FTB cannot change this policy because it is required by California law, yet have never cited this alleged statute number, which is a violation of TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242.

FTB requires married people to pay more estimated taxes and penalties than is owed. FTB does eventually refund the excess monies, but charges taxes on the refund. In Grab v FTB, I alleged this was an embezzlement and racketeering scheme. FTB never denied the allegations. I believe that financially penalizing the married violates the 14th Amendment. 

7. At the September Board Meeting, I addressed concerns about FTB’s Cal-EITC Education and Outreach Program. FTB was required to respond within 30-days, but failed to do so. Please respond now.

Thank you.

*Note: I am not suicidal, I don’t have depression issues, I am a careful driver, I rarely drink alcohol, and I do not use drugs of any kind (not even aspirin). My family lives a wholesome life. If something happens to me or my family that is out of character for us, we were set up by the State of California as revenge for exposing their crimes.*