Are IRS passport revocations & denials at all Constitutional?

Are IRS passport revocations & denials at all Constitutional?

https://ift.tt/2LDV5RO Is it constitutional for the IRS to revoke your passport? The government can now deny or revoke your passport for unpaid taxes. Does this sound at all Constitutional to you? If your passport can be taken away for unpaid taxes, what’s next? Will the government take away your voting rights? You right to own a firearm? In this video I am going to talk about a truly horrendous law that should concern everyone and what you should do if you are worried about losing your passport to unpaid taxes. The FAST Act of 2015 allows the IRS to direct the US state department to deny or revoke your US passport. When I first saw this, I couldn’t believe it passed. On the practical aspect, I know that the IRS and the State Department have enough work to do, and that this law will just burden them even more. But on an intellectual and moral level, this law just bugs me every which way. Why? Because while l know a US passport is technically the property of the US government, the US Supreme Court has ruled that the right to travel, even across borders is a fundamental right. A fundamental right. Meaning the right to travel is up there with freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of conscious. Fundamental. Rights do not get anymore important than fundamental. Now this is not to say the government can’t restrict or inhibit fundamental rights. The government can. It does all the time. But in order to do so, the government must provide due process which includes the right to be notified and the right to an impartial hearing. One of the problems with the passport revocation law is that the only notice comes though mail. And what’s worse, is the IRS admits that it has a difficult time getting mail to US persons overseas - all who likely have a US passport. Do you think a letter that you may or may not receive is proper notice before revoking a fundamental right? In additional, when impacting a fundamental right, the Supreme Court says legislation must pass the “Strict Scrutiny” standard of review. The highest level of review. To pass strict scrutiny, the legislation must further a compelling governmental interest, and also must have been narrowly tailored to achieve that interest. And this is where Congress loses me. I get that collecting revenue and ensuring compliance with tax laws is a compelling state interest. But how is taking away someone’s passport narrowly tailored to ensuring compliance with tax laws? There just can’t be some attenuated or indirect connection between the law and the desired outcome. But rather, the law must be narrowly tailored. Or to put it another way, how would be infringing on the fundamental right to travel be any different than other denial of other fundamental rights? It gets more obnoxious when you realize that the IRS was already the most powerful collection agency in the world. The IRS can levy, garnish, and file liens all without a court order! Why aren’t these narrowly tailored tools good enough? It is because the IRS isn’t using them to the fullest extent? Actually that is true. The IRS is so short staffed it can’t do the normal collections they used to do 10 years ago. So instead of funding the IRS to the appropriate level, Congress pulls this crap. Creating headaches for taxpayers, the IRS, the state department and my prediction, there will be no meaningful increase in revenues. Now would a constitutional argument prevail? The strongest argument I see is the lack of procedural due process. You simply should not be able to invalidate a fundamental right by mail, especially when you know mail is quite unreliable. And that impartial hearing in front of a judge is missing too. With IRS passport revocations, the only hearing you are entitled to, if you are not too late, is in front on an IRS Appeals Officer. And while I think this law should not pass strict scrutiny, the fact is the federal government is greedy for revenue and will bend over backwards to validate anything called a revenue bill — even if it fails to raise revenue. However, to win on a claim I would estimate about $150-300,000 in lawyer fees and the case might take years to resolve. In the meantime, the government takes your passport. That’s why I suggest if you have back taxes and you are worried about losing your passport contact us about our passport protection services. Our mantra is that every situation can be made better. So why not have one less thing to worry about. Parent & Parent LLP 144 South Main Street Wallingford, CT 06492 (203) 269-6699 info@irsmedic.com https://ift.tt/1RfwK1f https://youtu.be/LiTa3HWqeIY IRS Medic