[This has been sitting around Ida's place for a while, partly because she could not get it to OCR and partly because I don't think she understood how important it is.

It is as far from a brush off letter as I have seen, and while it does not commit the Senator to *do* anything, it indicates she (or at least someone on her staff) has an acute understanding of the problem of the cult corrupting the IRS.

You will notice that she endorses the court's opinion that the proper course is to sue the IRS to reverse the cult's preferential treatment.

It is hard to underestimate how important a Senatorial endorsement is in getting a major law firm to take on suing the IRS pro bono.

She also mentions the IRS refusing to turn over documents. With a little encouragement, a Senate committee might ask for the documents.

It would be an appropriate thing to do to follow up on this with letters thanking the Senator for her clear understanding the problem with Scientology and the IRS.

There are other hot matters you might bring up in a letter. Write me for details.

Keith Henson]

DIANNE FEINSTEIN
CALIFORNIA

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE ON RULES AND ADMINISTRATION
SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE

United States Senate
WASHINGTON GC 20510-0504
http://feinstein.senate.gov

April 22. 2002

Ms. Ida Camburn
1270 Vista Grande Dr.
I Hemet California 92543

Dear Ms. Camburn

Thank you for writing to express your concern regarding IRS policy and more specifically, deductions allowed for costs at religious studies and services. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.

On January 9, 2002 in the case of Michael Sklar; Maria Sklar v. Tax Ct- No, 1556-97 the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (9th Circuit) decided that the Sklars did not show that their payments for the secular and religious private education of their children exceeded the market value of other secular private school education available.

Therefore the Sklars were ineligible for the deductions that they took on the tax returns in question. The Court ruled that the IRS was right in disallowing the Sklar's deductions and it affirmed the Tax Court's earlier ruling. The Court's opinion largely cited two previous decisions: De long v. Commissioner 309 F.2d 373, 376, that says tuition paid for the education off taxpayer's children is a personal expense and non-deductiblc under § 170, and Hernandez v. Commissioner, 490 U.S. 680, that says there is no exception in the Tax Code for payments that one receives only religious benefit in return.

The Court's opinion states that the sole issue in question was whether the Sklars' claimed deduction was valid. and "not whether the members of The Church of Scientology have become the IRS's chosen people." The opinion also states that if the IRS is guilty of providing preferential treatment, the proper course of action is not to allow the IRS to expand its allowances for improper deductions, but rather a lawsuit to stop the policy of what the court may see as preferential treatment.

In a closing agreement between the IRS and the Church of Scientology, the IRS formally recognized the Church of Scientology International as a charitable organization described in section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code. In its decision, the Court comments that the IRS's refusal to reveal this agreement with the Church of Scientology is questionable. The IRS insists that its closing agreement with the Church cannot be disclosed because it contains tax return information.

For more detailed information I would urge you to visit the U.S.

Circuit Court of Appeals web site, which can he located at http://www.ce9.uscourts.gov/. I value and respect your opinion and hope that you will continue to share your concerns and ideas with me.

If I can he of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call my Washington, D.C. staff at (202) 224-3841.

With warmest personal regards.

Sincerely yours,

[signed]

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

DF:sw

On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 18:59:58 GMT, hkhenson@cogeco.ca (Keith Henson) wrote:

>
>[This has been sitting around Ida's place for a while, partly because
>she could not get it to OCR and partly because I don't think she
>understood how important it is.

Correction. Ida has only had this two days.

I cannot figure out why the letter was dated almost two months ago.

Being from a Senator who gets free postage, there is no postmark on the envelope.

Keith Henson

>April 22. 2002
>
>Ms. Ida Camburn
>1270 Vista Grande Dr.
>I Hemet California 92543
>
>Dear Ms. Camburn

Go Back