POPULARITY
139 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
10 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
8 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
10 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
6 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
6 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
6 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
5 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
7 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
6 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
9 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
3 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
4 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
10 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
4 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
2 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
3 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
5 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
7 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
3 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
3 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
3 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
5 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
3 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
2 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
2 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
2 episodes with Internal Revenue Code
Slam The Gavel podcast host, Maryann Petri discussed the article written by Justin McPhail, on 2-12-2026, "One Question Family Court Contempt Practice Cannot Survive." The discussion involved "Purge Amounts" and imputed incomes as well as how judges ILLEGALLY INFLATE Child Support Arrearages.To Reach Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comTo Reach Justin McPhail: Substack/justinmcphail@att.netSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Slam the Gavel host Maryann Petri discusses Michael "Thunder" Phillips article, written 2-22-2026, "Father Ambushed and Stabbed During Custody Swap: When "Routine Exchanges Turn Violent. News4 San Antonio reported this article that Michael is referring to. The host also questioned why main media is not carrying these articles related to violence perpetuated through the Family Court system. Also in these articles that are mentioned by small news stations such as News4 San Antonio, why aren't the judges, attorneys and Guardian Ad Litems (3rd Party Parasites) mentioned?To Reach Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Welcome to EO Radio Show – Your Nonprofit Legal Resource. We're starting 2026 the way I always start election years, with a reminder to leadership of charities and private foundations to refresh their understanding of election-year issues for those organizations that want to remain exempt under Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(3). This year, there is an update I want to call out regarding a court case in Texas and proposed federal legislation that could change the scope of the prohibition on candidate intervention by certain kinds of charities. In the next few weeks, we'll refresh EO Radio Show episodes seven and eight, which address legislative lobbying by public charities and private foundations, also likely to be very hot topics in 2026. Be sure to check out the show notes for resources from the IRS on these topics as well. Show Notes: Farella Webinar: Election Year Issues for Private Foundations and Public Charities Bolder Advocacy Resource Library IRS Chart: Common Tax Law Restrictions on Activities of Exempt Organizations Treasury Regulation 53.4945-3, Voter Registration Drives Instructions for IRS Form 8940, Request for Miscellaneous Determinations, used to obtain advance approval of certain voter registration drives under IRC 4945(f) Eastern District of Texas homepage (includes direct links to ECF/PACER and to govinfo Opinions for E.D. Tex.): https://www.txed.uscourts.gov/ E.D. Tex. Opinions on Govinfo: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/district/txed/ H.R. 2501 (119th Congress) — Free Speech Fairness Act (status: Introduced; referred to Ways and Means, 03/31/2025): https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/2501 S. 1205 (119th Congress) — Free Speech Fairness Act (status: Introduced; referred to Finance, 03/31/2025): https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/1205 White House Briefing Room (official presidential statements, speeches, and releases): https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/ Farella YouTube podcasts If you have suggestions for topics you would like us to discuss, please email us at eoradioshow@fbm.com. DISCLAIMER: This podcast is for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to be, nor should it be interpreted as, legal advice or opinion.
Slam The Gavel welcomes back Andrea Brewer to the podcast. Today she discussed how the states are handling a person's gender on their birth certificate from the date of birth. Andrea went over some of the states that have administrative processes and the statistics of some of the states where there is no court order required, and how many states allow for a change of gender just on a simple affidavit. The VS42 form was discussed as well as it appears anyone can put information on this document for gender. Also was discussed Debbie Carroll's contribution to the book Raised By These Wolves, Family and Juvenile Courts Continue to Destroy Future Generations, which involved the Memorandum of Procedure.To Reach Andrea Brewer: oceandesignzart@gmail.comSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Send a textJeff and Scott chat with Mike Kaercher, Deputy Director of the Tax Law Center at NYU Law, about where tax law comes from. We often refer to “tax law,” but in this episode we unpack what that actually means—how the Internal Revenue Code, Treasury Regulations, and court cases, all the rest, all fit together, and who actually writes the words on the pages we consider to be tax law.
Slam The Gavel welcomes Bill Ayers, President of PA Bikers For Justice. Bill Ayers and others had gotten involved in helping victims of Parental Alienation through their work helping crime victims. They found a connection where many victims of child abuse and crimes against children had a connection to those children also being victims of Parental Alienation. This led to the changes in laws and policies and creating awareness of Parental Alienation. PA Bikers for Justice do rallies once a year during around the weekend of Parental Alienation. This year they will be having a rally in Lackawanna County, Lackawanna County Courthouse in PA. PA Bikers For Justice has assisted thousands of victims since 1997 as a community watch group in West Scranton PA, then escorting victims to court, and branching out in other counties and are now statewide. We discussed when an individual is released from prison, exonerated, they should be compensated so they don't end up homeless. Once exonerated the arrest record remains, so they have to go through an expungement process in which they petition the court and get a court order to expunge the arrest so it is no longer on their record. This could take two months to two years. Pennsylvania is indeed breeding poverty. To Reach Bill Ayers, President of PA Bikers For Justice: pabikersforjustice@gmail.com, on X: @PAbiker4justice, on Instagram: @pabikers4justice. TEXT: 570-209-8472Supportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDkl https://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making aSupport the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Families with disabled students often face extra out-of-pocket costs—costs they wouldn't have if their child weren't disabled—to secure the same education other students receive for free, yet tax relief for those expenses is limited and unclear. Garret Hoff, J.D., argues that Internal Revenue Code Section 213 and its interpretations reflect a time when disabled people were not viewed as worth public money to educate, leaving families with arbitrary distinctions under the medical expense deduction. Hoff recommends the IRS revise Treasury Regulation 1.213-1(e)(1)(v)(a) to recognize a broader reading of Section 213, and he urges Congress to amend Section 529A, created by the ABLE Act, to lift contribution limits and make contributions tax deductible so families can fund qualified disability expenses through ABLE accounts. Hoff adds that lasting access and justice require cultural change, not only tax revisions. Series: "Autism Tree Project Annual Neuroscience Conference" [Public Affairs] [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 41178]
Families with disabled students often face extra out-of-pocket costs—costs they wouldn't have if their child weren't disabled—to secure the same education other students receive for free, yet tax relief for those expenses is limited and unclear. Garret Hoff, J.D., argues that Internal Revenue Code Section 213 and its interpretations reflect a time when disabled people were not viewed as worth public money to educate, leaving families with arbitrary distinctions under the medical expense deduction. Hoff recommends the IRS revise Treasury Regulation 1.213-1(e)(1)(v)(a) to recognize a broader reading of Section 213, and he urges Congress to amend Section 529A, created by the ABLE Act, to lift contribution limits and make contributions tax deductible so families can fund qualified disability expenses through ABLE accounts. Hoff adds that lasting access and justice require cultural change, not only tax revisions. Series: "Autism Tree Project Annual Neuroscience Conference" [Public Affairs] [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 41178]
Families with disabled students often face extra out-of-pocket costs—costs they wouldn't have if their child weren't disabled—to secure the same education other students receive for free, yet tax relief for those expenses is limited and unclear. Garret Hoff, J.D., argues that Internal Revenue Code Section 213 and its interpretations reflect a time when disabled people were not viewed as worth public money to educate, leaving families with arbitrary distinctions under the medical expense deduction. Hoff recommends the IRS revise Treasury Regulation 1.213-1(e)(1)(v)(a) to recognize a broader reading of Section 213, and he urges Congress to amend Section 529A, created by the ABLE Act, to lift contribution limits and make contributions tax deductible so families can fund qualified disability expenses through ABLE accounts. Hoff adds that lasting access and justice require cultural change, not only tax revisions. Series: "Autism Tree Project Annual Neuroscience Conference" [Public Affairs] [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 41178]
Slam The Gavel podcast welcomes new guests, Bob Terrien and Don Wenger. Today we talked about the history of the Loophole in 42 U.S.C. Subsection 659 AND 666. Because of that loophole, states are using to make money by converting veteran benefits into state revenue. It says that veteran benefits received by military retirees can be garnished if the retiree has waived military pay to receive compensation benefits from the VA. It should say that ALL VA benefits are exempt from Title IV-D, regardless of whether the veteran is retired or not. Congress has exercised constitutional power to make it clear that veteran benefits have always been totally exempt from state jurisdiction....To Reach Bob Terrien and Don Wenger: VeteranHope.orgSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Slam The Gavel welcomes Mary Bowen to the podcast. Mary and her fiancé participated in extensive Pre-Cana classes before marrying at the Cathedral of St. Mary in Austin Texas in 7-25-1998. However, her husband filed for divorce in 10-18-2021 in the County Courthouse in Bastrop, Texas. The case number is 21-20960. At this point Mary has been married a total of 27 years. Mary is a devout, practicing Catholic, who honors marriage vows made to God. The Constitutional Challenge, referencing Texas Family Code 6.001, was just filed in November 17th, 2025. The Texas Family Code 6.001: INSUPPORTABILITY. On the petition of either party to a marriage, the court may grant a divorce without regard to fault if the marriage has become in supportable because of discord or conflict of personalities that destroys the legitimate ends of the marital relationship and prevents any reasonable exception of reconciliation.To Reach Mary Bowen: mbowen7736@gmail.comhttps://www.givesendgo.com/SanctusFamilyhttps://www.texasnofault.com/Supportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Slam The Gavel welcomes back James Schoch from PA to the podcast. Jim was last on Slam The Gavel Season 3, Episodes 3, 37 and 109, Season 4, Episodes 81 and 113 and Season 5 Episode 279. Today Jim discussed how his case has been settled and now how to deal with the attack on the child's mind. We discussed Child Psychological Abuse, found in the DSMV, V995.51, and how it affects on the child's mind and creates a new generation of personality disorders. We talked about Robert Garza's bill and how Legislation is handling Custodial Interference.To Reach Jim Schoch: mule1991@yahoo.comSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Investor Fuel Real Estate Investing Mastermind - Audio Version
In this episode of the Real Estate Pros podcast, host Michelle Kesil welcomes Jeffrey Peterson, a Minnesota attorney and tax law professor specializing in 1031 exchange strategies. Jeffrey explains the intricacies of Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, which allows real estate investors to defer taxes on gains from the sale of appreciated properties by reinvesting in similar properties. He emphasizes the importance of working with qualified intermediaries to navigate the complexities of these exchanges and avoid common pitfalls, such as receiving proceeds before setting up the exchange. Professional Real Estate Investors - How we can help you: Investor Fuel Mastermind: Learn more about the Investor Fuel Mastermind, including 100% deal financing, massive discounts from vendors and sponsors you're already using, our world class community of over 150 members, and SO much more here: http://www.investorfuel.com/apply Investor Machine Marketing Partnership: Are you looking for consistent, high quality lead generation? Investor Machine is America's #1 lead generation service professional investors. Investor Machine provides true 'white glove' support to help you build the perfect marketing plan, then we'll execute it for you…talking and working together on an ongoing basis to help you hit YOUR goals! Learn more here: http://www.investormachine.com Coaching with Mike Hambright: Interested in 1 on 1 coaching with Mike Hambright? Mike coaches entrepreneurs looking to level up, build coaching or service based businesses (Mike runs multiple 7 and 8 figure a year businesses), building a coaching program and more. Learn more here: https://investorfuel.com/coachingwithmike Attend a Vacation/Mastermind Retreat with Mike Hambright: Interested in joining a "mini-mastermind" with Mike and his private clients on an upcoming "Retreat", either at locations like Cabo San Lucas, Napa, Park City ski trip, Yellowstone, or even at Mike's East Texas "Big H Ranch"? Learn more here: http://www.investorfuel.com/retreat Property Insurance: Join the largest and most investor friendly property insurance provider in 2 minutes. Free to join, and insure all your flips and rentals within minutes! There is NO easier insurance provider on the planet (turn insurance on or off in 1 minute without talking to anyone!), and there's no 15-30% agent mark up through this platform! Register here: https://myinvestorinsurance.com/ New Real Estate Investors - How we can work together: Investor Fuel Club (Coaching and Deal Partner Community): Looking to kickstart your real estate investing career? Join our one of a kind Coaching Community, Investor Fuel Club, where you'll get trained by some of the best real estate investors in America, and partner with them on deals! You don't need $ for deals…we'll partner with you and hold your hand along the way! Learn More here: http://www.investorfuel.com/club —--------------------
Slam the Gavel podcast welcomes back Mark Andrews. Mark was last on the podcast Season 6, Episode 331. Today we discussed the fraud upon the court, the issues with the alteration of a transcript and how Mark went with other parents, and with Robert Garza on Zoom to discuss with Legislation five bills. Some of the bills were Time Taken, Time Back, Cameras in Court and Parenting Plans and several others. We also talked about the article written by Laura A. Bischoff, of the Columbus Dispatch: Ohio Supreme Court Suspends judge's law license for steering work to love interest." Change is coming. Change is coming.To Reach Mark Andrews: nottobetakenaway@live.comSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536 Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Slam The Gavel welcomes back Marc Fishman to the podcast. Marc was last on Season 6, Episode 343. Today we talked about the 'double standards of justice' and putting 'teeth' into a law questioning the protection of former police officers that have been labeled, 'PATTERN MISCONDUCT,' by the AG in New York. In April of 2021, Governor Cuomo signed in the Law Enforcement Misconduct Law into the Social Justice Unit of the Attorney General's Office. Since that time 38 officers have been reviewed for misconduct. This law requires that the Police Chief of NY notify the AG when a police officer had had five or more incidents of reported misconduct. Once the AG is notified, they are supposed to investigate. But the million dollar question is, when will they?To Reach Marc Fishman: protectnewyorkers.com and newrochellepoliceabuse.comSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536 Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Slam The Gavel welcomes back Tanith Pereira to the podcast. Tanith is speaking out for the second time as she was last on Season 6, Episode 352. The Estoppel case continues to be dragged out by Judge Michael L. Katz in the State of New York. Tanith discussed how her rights have been violated and has not received Due Process. With a judge dragging his feet, her son is suffering in a fatherless home with a man who isn't even his father.To Reach. Tanith Pereira: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536 Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
On this episode, we're going back-to-basics to discuss the rules that apply when nonprofits engage in lobbying activities. With legislative sessions ramping-up in several states, it's important to take time to understand the lobbying limits and definitions that apply to your organization's advocacy. But, it's even more important to recognize that public charities can lobby and advocate for or against legislation at the local, state, and federal levels. So, rally your staff and volunteers, and speak up, because your nonprofit can play an important role in impacting public policy. Attorneys for this Episode Brittany Leonard Tim Mooney Natalie Roetzel Ossenfort The Importance of Lobbying Big business often pays for expensive lobbyists to represent their interests in front of legislators, but normal community members cannot foot that bill. Nonprofits who lobby can step up and fill the void. 501(c)(3) public charities can use their experience, funding, and passion for their mission to represent communities by advocating for or against changes to law. For example, Movement Advancement Project tracked the 2025 spring legislative session and found that every state except for Vermont had an anti-LGBTQ bill proposed but 88% of them did not become law. This was due in part to great nonprofits lobbying against these bills. How Much Lobbying Can Public Charities Do? Internal Revenue Code provides two ways for public charities to measure their lobbying limits Default, Insubstantial Part Test: Public charities can lobby so long as lobbying is an "insubstantial part" of their overall activities (around 3-5% of total activities). Activities based test, not dollar-based Broad definitions of lobbying 501(h) Expenditure Test: Most public charities can opt in to using this test to measure their limits (as opposed to the insubstantial part test), and when they do, it provides a mathematical formula to calculate lobbying limits. Dollar-based test (unpaid, volunteer activities don't count against limits) Narrower definitions of what qualifies as lobbying Many organizations can put up to 20% of their budget toward lobbying using the 501(h) election, but the exact amount depends on the organization's annual exempt purpose expenditures. What is Lobbying? The definition of lobbying depends on which of the two Internal Revenue Code tests your public charity uses to measure its limits Insubstantial Part Test: anything that advocates for or against legislation at any level of government is lobbying. For example: Advocating against a proposed ordinance in your city that would update the housing code in a way that would negatively impact the communities you serve Supporting a ballot measure that would codify reproductive rights in your state's constitution Talking to members of Congress to oppose the "Nonprofit Killer" bill Engaging in advocacy in an attempt to influence what gets included in your state's budget 501(h) Expenditure Test Direct Lobbying: Communication to a legislator (or their staff) that expresses a view on specific legislation. For example: Calling your Senator to encourage them to vote for an upcoming bill that will give every family a free puppy Emailing your State Rep's Chief of Staff to recommend an increase in funding for animal shelter improvements in the state's budget Grassroots Lobbying: Communicating to the general public your organization's view on specific legislation with a call to action (only four types). For example: Placing an ad in the newspaper that says "Call your Senator and express your support for legislation that would give every family a free puppy." Putting a web form on your public charity's website that encourages supporters to input their name and zip code to have a letter in support of a state-level bill automatically sent to their legislators What about a Threads post encouraging the public to vote in support of a local bond initiative or other ballot measure? Direct Lobbying. Why? The public is a legislator in the ballot measure process, because the public decides whether the measure passes (and becomes law) or fails (does not become law). Keep in mind that in addition to counting ballot measure advocacy against your lobbying limits, your ballot measure advocacy may also trigger state or local-level campaign finance reporting (since it happens in the election context). Examples of activities that do not count as lobbying include education about legislation without expressing a view, advocating for or against executive agency action, for or against executive orders, public education with no call to action under 501h, litigation, etc. Lobbying definitions can also vary according to state law. State laws generally don't limit how much lobbying a public charity can do, but they do require lobbyist registration and reporting when certain thresholds are met. State laws often define lobbying differently from the Internal Revenue Code and can include both legislative and executive branch advocacy activities. Resources Being a Player: A Guide to the IRS Lobbying Regulations for Advocacy Charities Public Charities Can Lobby: Factsheet State Law Resources: Nonprofit Lobbying Practical Guidance 501(h) Lobbying Limit Calculator
Slam The Gavel welcomes back Wren Byrd to the podcast. Wren was last on the podcast Season 5, Episode 213. Today we discussed what has changed in regards to the system and how parents are treated, especially during litigation. We also discussed why there is no enforcement of laws ALREADY in place. Wren brought up the book, "The Family Law Professional's Field Guide to HIGH CONFLICT LITIGATION; Dynamics, Not Diagnoses by Benjamin D. Garber, PhD, Dana Prescott, JD, LMSW, PhD and Chris Mulchay, PhD. The American Bar Association is endorsing it. Where can this lead while training judges to do the right thing by all families and their children?To Reach Wren Byrd: info@foundingmoms.orgSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536 Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
January 30, 2026 marks the 50th anniversary of Buckley v. Valeo, a landmark First Amendment speech clause case. While the podcast normally airs current oral arguments, we thought that it would be interesting to spotlight the oral arguments in this landmark case during month of its anniversary.Episode 44: Buckley v. ValeoJames L. Buckley, et al. v. Francis R. Valeo, Secretary of the United States Senate, et al. argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on November 10, 1975 and decided on January 30, 1976. Argued by Ralph K. Winter, Joel M. Gora, Brice M. Claggett, and (on behalf of James L. Buckley) and Daniel M. Friedman, Archibald Cox, Lloyd N. Cutler, and Ralph S. Spritzer (on behalf of Francis R. Valeo). Case Background [from the Federal Election Commission]:On January 2, 1975, the suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Senator James L. Buckley of New York, Eugene McCarthy, Presidential candidate and former Senator from Minnesota, and several others. The defendants included Francis R. Valeo, Secretary of the Senate and Ex officio member of the newly formed Federal Election Commission, and the Commission itself. The plaintiffs charged that the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), under which the Commission was formed, and the Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act were unconstitutional on a number of grounds.On January 24, 1975, pursuant to Section 437h(a) of the FECA, the district court certified the constitutional questions in the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. On August 15, 1975, the appeals court rendered a decision upholding almost all of the substantive provisions of the FECA with respect to contributions, expenditures and disclosure. The court also sustained the constitutionality of the method of appointing the Commission.On September 19, 1975, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the Supreme Court, which reached its decision on January 30, 1976. Questions Presented, from the Appellants' Brief: 1. Did the Court of Appeals correctly conclude that the limitations imposed by FECA on expenditures by political candidates and organizations are constitutional?2. Did the Court of Appeals correctly conclude that the limitation imposed by FECA on expenditures by any person relative to a clearly identified candidate are constitutional?3. Did the Court of Appeals correctly conclude that the limitations imposed by FECA on contributions to political candidates and organizations are constitutional?4. Did the Court of Appeals correctly conclude that the disclosure requirements imposed on political candidates, organizations and individuals by FECA are constitutional?5. Did the courts below correctly conclude that the public financing provisions of FECA and Subtitle H of the Internal Revenue Code are constitutional?6. Did the Court of Appeals correctly conclude that the method provided by FECA for appointing members of the Federal Election Commission is constitutional?7. Did the Court of Appeals properly decline to decide whether certain powers conferred upon the Federal Election Commission by FECA are constitutional?8. Are the powers conferred upon the Federal Election Commission by FECA constitutional?Resources: Supreme Court OpinionInstitute for Free Speech AnalysisC-SPAN Buckley v. Valeo Panel 1C-SPAN Buckley v. Valeo Panel 2C-SPAN Buckley v. Valeo Panel 3The Institute for Free Speech promotes and defends the political speech rights to freely speak, assemble, publish, and petition the government guaranteed by the First Amendment. If you're enjoying the Free Speech Arguments podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on your preferred podcast platform. To support the Institute's mission or inquire about legal assistance, please visit our website: www.ifs.org
Slam the Gavel welcomes back Debbie Carroll to the podcast accompanied by Lindsey Shaffer. Debbie was last on the podcast Season 5, Episodes 167, 180 and 236; Season 6, Episode 327. Debbie discussed the Memorandum Of Procedure (MOP) and its disgusting implications along with the hard facts of foster care. Lindsey discussed her history that she and her spouse had a baby girl 5-18-2104, but her spouse decided to move back in with his parents and brothers who were volatile. Lindsey didn't want to live with these brothers and she contacted CPS to see if they could offer other options such as housing. As a result her daughter was removed on 10-16-2015. Trying to find her way through what had unfolded with CPS and a certain caseworker, Lindsey wrote two books,"The Missing," and "Imperium Conflictus." These books can be found on Amazon, Google Play and Pay Hip.To Reach Debbie Carroll: carrolldebbie73@yahoo.com or considerationnonprofit.orgTo Reach Lindsey Shaffer: motivatedirishangel42@yahoo.comSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536 Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Slam The Gavel welcomes new guest Tanith Pereira from Manhattan, NY. She has a case suffering in limbo at the hands of Judge Michael L. Katz. Her son was taken away from her when he was just ten years old. The case is five-plus years and going. She only gets to see him every other weekend for just one hour. Her son is suffering from medical and educational neglect. Tanith is choosing to speak out even though the judge has forbidden her to go on Social Media. But Tanith is speaking out for the sake of her son and her First Amendment Rights.To Reach Tanith Pereira: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcast?si=INW9XaTyprKsaDklhttps://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536 Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Slam The Gavel welcomes back Justin McPhail to the podcast. He was last on Season 6, Episode 346, talking how "It Wasn't About The Money." Justin came on the podcast to discuss the Systemic Issues within the Family Court system and how important it is to leave a paper trail. Affidavits were discussed and how import they are to the record. The breaks in Due Process invalidate Family Court proceedings. Justin also discussed more deeply how psychological evaluations and drug tests are illegal and unconstitutional. "Nothing holds true in Family Court, think for yourself, no one else is going to," states Justin.To Reach Justin McPhail: justinmcphail@att.net and SUBSTACK: @justinmcphail1Supportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536https://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536 Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Slam The Gavel welcomes new guest, Latesha Howard to the podcast. Latesha is a mother in San Bernardino CA. She is an advocate for Special Education and has three children of her own. She also has three adopted nieces and nephews that were taken away by CFS (CPS). Latesha is being retaliated on for being an advocate for the children regarding Special Education services. The school staff were annoyed with Latesha for advocating for services for the children and called Children and Family services on her for this reason. With all the stress Latesha has had to endure, she now suffers from Vitiligo. Latesha has filed a law suit encompassing all individuals involved in the mistreatment of her nieces and nephews. She also has court this Thursday, the 8th of January, 2025. Will follow this case.To Reach Latesha Howard: lathow2@yahoo.comSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536https://substack.com/@maryannpetri?r=kd7n6&utm_medium=iosInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536 Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetri https://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Slam The Gavel podcast welcomes back Todd Humes. He was last on the podcast Season 6, Episode 341. Today Todd gave updates regarding his case involving fraud, no Due Process, and how he has STILL been paying Alimony (while NOT divorced) for the last 5 YEARS at $360.00 per week. Today we discussed the corruption in the Domestic Relations Units and how a second Protection of Abuse Order has been signed with NO EVIDENCE by Judge Kurtz. Todd still hasn't been to court for the divorce to be finalized and his civil suit against his ex-wife and business partner. We also discussed the corrupt lawyers obstructing HIS JUSTICE and the corruption inside the courthouses in Pennsylvania.To Reach Todd Humes: thumes42@gmail.com(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Navigating the Federal Tax Controversy: From Audit to CourtThis conversation delves into the complexities of federal tax controversy, emphasizing the procedural landscape that taxpayers must navigate when facing IRS challenges. It covers misconceptions about tax filing, the distinction between tax avoidance and evasion, the importance of willfulness in tax defense, civil penalties, the audit process, document control, the assessment and collection phases, IRS enforcement tools, the appeals process, litigation paths, and the balance between tax collection and due process.In the complex world of federal tax controversy, understanding the procedural landscape is crucial. This isn't about tax rates or deductions; it's about the battlefield that emerges when the IRS challenges your return. From the initial audit to the high-stakes decision of where to litigate, the journey is fraught with procedural intricacies.The Misconception of Voluntary FilingA common misconception is that filing a federal tax return is voluntary. This misunderstanding stems from the phrase "voluntary assessment and payment," often misinterpreted by tax protesters. In reality, while the assessment is voluntary, the duty to disclose and pay is mandatory, as reinforced by the Internal Revenue Code.The Role of Penalties and CompliancePenalties play a significant role in ensuring compliance. The IRS imposes severe sanctions, including civil penalties and criminal prosecution, for those who attempt to subvert mandatory filing rules. Courts consistently reject arguments based on the voluntary premise, labeling them as legally meritless.Strategic Choices in LitigationChoosing the right judicial forum is a critical strategic decision. The U. S. Tax Court allows taxpayers to litigate without prepayment, offering a venue with judges who specialize in tax law. Alternatively, refund litigation in District Court or the Court of Federal Claims requires full payment upfront but offers the possibility of a jury trial.Mastery of procedural rules is as vital as understanding the substantive tax code. From the 90-day letter to the variance doctrine, procedural planning must precede substantive preparation. As you navigate this complex landscape, remember that the system is designed to ensure compliance through robust enforcement, not just civic goodwill.Subscribe now to stay informed on the latest in tax law and controversy.TakeawaysThe IRS challenges can be likened to a battlefield.Filing taxes is mandatory, not voluntary.Taxpayers must self-assess their tax liabilities.Tax avoidance is legal, while tax evasion is criminal.Willfulness is crucial in defending against tax charges.Civil penalties can be severe for non-compliance.The audit process begins with information requests.Document control is vital during IRS examinations.Tax assessments carry a presumption of correctness.Taxpayers have rights to challenge IRS actions.IRS, tax controversy, tax filing, tax evasion, tax avoidance, tax penalties, tax audit, tax litigation, tax compliance, tax law
Slam The Gavel Podcast welcomes back Ellie who was last on the podcast Season 6, Episode 324. Today Ellie discussed updates discussing how her daughter became confused in school and suddenly wanted to be called by a "male" name. An inept caseworker, Attorney Annika Stokes, GAL Michael Horan and Judge Molly Bigelow in Shasta California have an agenda of their own: to put Ellie's daughter in foster care and eventually adopt her out. Ellie still doesn't know if her daughter was given hormones or other psychiatric medications. At present her daughter is residing in foster care, living with five other children and is sharing a room with a male. Ellie discussed the corruption in the courts and the immigrant component. Ellie and her family came to the U.S. LEGALLY and because of their accent, and culture are being treated like garbage. Her family's Due Process Rights have been violated for so long. Ellie also discussed getting her story out to other media outlets.To Reach Ellie: shastaforart@gmail.com, on X: https://x.com/Ellieforpa22611, Substack: https://honeybadgerukrainian.substack.com/(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Understanding Gross Income: The Foundation of Tax LawThis conversation delves into the intricate world of gross income and its foundational role in tax law. It explores the expansive definition of gross income as outlined in Section 61 of the Internal Revenue Code, the judicial interpretations that have shaped its understanding, and the critical importance of realization in determining taxable income. The discussion also covers common categories of income, statutory exclusions, and the administrative choices made by the IRS that impact taxation. Additionally, it addresses timing rules and the claim of right doctrine, emphasizing the tension between inclusion and exclusion in tax law.In the world of tax law, understanding the concept of gross income is crucial. It's the bedrock upon which the entire tax system is built. This blog post explores the intricacies of gross income, drawing insights from landmark cases and statutory provisions.The Broad Net of Section 61: Section 61 of the Internal Revenue Code casts a wide net, defining gross income as "all income from whatever source derived." This expansive definition ensures that nearly every form of economic gain is captured, from wages and business income to unexpected windfalls.Judicial Interpretation and the Glenshaw Glass Test: The Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass established a three-part test for determining income: an undeniable accession to wealth, clearly realized, and under the taxpayer's complete dominion. This test has become a cornerstone of tax law, guiding the inclusion of various forms of income.Navigating Exclusions and Exceptions: While the presumption is that all accessions to wealth are income, there are statutory exclusions, such as gifts and inheritances under Section 102. The Duberstein case highlights the importance of the giver's intent in distinguishing between a gift and compensation.The Role of Realization: Realization is a critical concept in tax law, determining when income is recognized. The Eisner v. McComber case illustrates that mere appreciation in value is not enough; a specific event, like a sale, must occur to trigger taxation.Understanding gross income is essential for navigating the complexities of tax law. By mastering the principles of inclusion, realization, and statutory exclusions, one can effectively analyze and apply tax rules. As the IRS continues to adapt to new economic realities, the definition of gross income will undoubtedly evolve, shaping the future of tax law.Subscribe now to stay updated on the latest insights in tax law and beyond.TakeawaysGross income is the foundation of tax law.The definition of gross income is expansive and includes all accessions to wealth.Judicial interpretations, particularly the Glenshaw Glass case, have shaped the understanding of income.Realization is crucial; income is only taxed when it is realized through a specific event.Gifts and inheritances are excluded from gross income under Section 102.Illegal income is still considered taxable income.The claim of right doctrine allows taxpayers to deduct repayments in the year they occur.Administrative choices by the IRS can lead to non-taxation of certain accessions to wealth.Timing rules are essential for understanding when income is recognized for tax purposes.The tension between inclusion and exclusion reflects the policy goals of the tax system.gross income, tax law, judicial interpretation, Glenshaw Glass, realization, income categories, tax exclusions, administrative choices, timing rules, general welfare exception
Understanding the Intricacies of Tax Law: A Deep DiveThis conversation provides a comprehensive overview of tax law, focusing on the Internal Revenue Code and its structure. It demystifies the complexities of tax law, emphasizing the logical framework that governs it. The discussion covers the role of the IRS, the differences between tax avoidance and evasion, and the intricacies of real estate taxation. Key strategies for navigating tax disputes and understanding tax classifications are explored, along with mechanisms for measuring gain and loss, tax deferral, and depreciation recapture. The conversation concludes with practical advice for law students and practitioners on how to approach tax law effectively.Tax law often conjures images of complex codes and daunting regulations. However, beneath this seemingly impenetrable surface lies a structured and logical system. In this post, we unravel the intricacies of tax law, focusing on its statutory framework and the pivotal role it plays in shaping economic behavior.The Architecture of Tax Law: Tax law is fundamentally statutory, with the Internal Revenue Code serving as its backbone. Unlike other areas of law, where judicial opinions shape the landscape, tax law is primarily driven by Congress. This statutory nature rewards methodical analysis and precise application, making it a unique field within the legal system.The Dual Purpose of Tax Rules: Every tax rule serves two masters: revenue generation and policy implementation. Congress uses the tax code to influence economic behavior, encouraging investments and penalizing certain activities. Understanding this dual purpose is crucial for navigating the complexities of tax law.The Hierarchy of Authority: Navigating tax law requires an understanding of its hierarchy of authority. At the top are the statutes, followed by Treasury regulations, which carry significant weight. Below these are revenue rulings and procedures, which provide guidance but lack the binding authority of regulations.Real Estate and Tax Classification: In real estate, classification is key. The purpose for which a property is held determines its tax treatment, affecting deductions, depreciation, and the character of gains or losses. Mastering these classifications is essential for effective tax planning and compliance.Conclusion: Tax law, often viewed as a burden, is a powerful tool for economic incentives. By understanding its structure and purpose, legal professionals can navigate its complexities and leverage its provisions for strategic advantage. As you delve into the world of tax law, remember that the code is your guide, and methodical application is your ally.Subscribe now to stay updated on the latest insights in tax law and other legal topics.TakeawaysTax law is structured and logical, contrary to common belief.Understanding the hierarchy of tax law is crucial for analysis.The IRS plays a significant role in interpreting tax law.Tax avoidance is legal, while tax evasion is not.Real estate classification is key to tax outcomes.Section 1231 provides beneficial treatment for certain assets.Recognized gain is generally required unless exempted by law.The boot rule affects recognized gain in exchanges.Long-term holding periods can mitigate tax liabilities.Always start tax analysis with the statute itself.tax law, Internal Revenue Code, tax court, IRS, tax avoidance, real estate taxation, tax strategies, depreciation, tax deferral, tax policy
Slam the Gavel welcomes Heather Bendl and Pete Arnold to the podcast. Heather was last on Season 5, Episode 262. Today Heather is currently juggling active appeals in both Florida and Illinois, effectively schooling the courts on why they can't just ignore the rulebook, specifically regarding jurisdiction and the UCCJEA. She is challenging a legal nightmare where Florida is trying to enforce a Void Ab Initio Illinois order that was issued without notice and without authority. Heather is asking the higher courts to remind the lower courts that geography and Due Process definitely matter. Heather's fiancé, Pete Arnold joins her fight as the strategist turning mountains of legal chaos into a clear roadmap for accountability. Together, they aren't just fighting Heather's battle but exposing a systemic crisis where evidence is ignored and parents are silenced. To Reach Heather and Peter: Non-Profit Email Address: JusticefortheSerlickChildren@gmail.comNon-Profit YouTube Channel:https://www.youtube.com/@JusticefortheSerlickChildrenNon-Profit FB Page:https://www.facebook.com/JusticefortheSerlickChildren(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Slam The Gavel podcast welcomes new guest Justin McPhail. Justin McPhail is a father living in Mississippi and is a business owner. Justin went through a divorce in 2012 and had joint legal custody at that time. However, three years into the case, in April of 2015, He was incarcerated for six years trying to exercise his Constitutional Rights all for being in the arrears $1,400.00, refusing a Drug Test and a Psychological Evaluation. Simultaneously when Justin was incarcerated, his son had some trouble in school. From there, his 12 year-old son was sent to a juvenile detention center, then to the Alabama Reform School for boys, then sent on to French Camp Academy 2018-2021. Father and son corresponded through mail, then they were able to communicate via phone calls. When his son was 17 years-old, his son was helping his father financially. Justin states, "the judge knows the truth, but is helping the attorneys hide it, is what is going on."Supportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536 Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/aboout*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner shall be held harmless and indemnified from any and all legal liability.Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
Bryan Sajjadi, a Capital Market Strategist at Fidelity Investments, shares how Fidelity's privately owned structure and long-term orientation influence the way investment decisions are made. He outlines how the firm's global research platform—spanning equities, fixed income, sectors, and quantitative analysis—is designed to challenge assumptions, share perspectives, and provide a fuller picture of risk and opportunity across market cycles. Rather than relying on a single style or viewpoint, Sajjadi emphasizes the value of combining multiple disciplines to navigate changing market environments. Sajjadi also discusses how Fidelity blends fundamental research with quantitative tools and emerging technologies to support portfolio decisions and risk awareness. He points to collaboration across asset classes, access to private markets, and long-standing company relationships as inputs that inform—not dictate—investment outcomes. Looking ahead, he frames the market outlook in practical terms, highlighting the need for selectivity, diversification, and flexibility as economic conditions evolve and dispersion across assets increases. Resources: Portfolio Construction | Fidelity Institutional Disclosures: Not FDIC Insured. May Lose Value. No Bank Guarantee. Not NCUA or NCUSIF insured. May lose value. No credit union guarantee. Unless otherwise expressly disclosed to you in writing, the information provided in this material is for educational purposes only. Any viewpoints expressed by Fidelity are not intended to be used as a primary basis for your investment decisions and are based on facts and circumstances at the point in time they are made and are not particular to you. Accordingly, nothing in this material constitutes impartial investment advice or advice in a fiduciary capacity, as defined or under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 or the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, both as amended. Fidelity and its representatives may have a conflict of interest in the products or services mentioned in this material because they have a financial interest in the products or services and may receive compensation, directly or indirectly, in connection with the management, distribution, and/or servicing of these products or services, including Fidelity funds, certain third-party funds and products, and certain investment services. Before making any investment decisions, you should take into account all of the particular facts and circumstances of your or your client's individual situation and reach out to an investment professional, if applicable Information provided is general in nature. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal or tax advice. Fidelity does not provide legal or tax advice. Views expressed are as of the date indicated, based on the information available at that time, and may change based on market and other conditions. Unless otherwise noted, the opinions provided are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Fidelity Investments or its affiliates. Fidelity does not assume any duty to update any of the information. Fidelity Investments is an independent company, unaffiliated with IRIS Media Works, LLC. There is no form of legal partnership, agency affiliation, or similar relationship between IRIS Media Works, LLC. and Fidelity Investments, nor is such a relationship created or implied by the information herein. Fidelity Investments has not been involved with the preparation of the content supplied by IRIS Media Works, LLC. and does not guarantee, or assume any responsibility for, its content. Stock markets, especially foreign markets, are volatile and can decline significantly in response to adverse issuer, political, regulatory, market, or economic developments. Although the funds seek to beat the index, this is not guaranteed, and these funds may trail the index. Foreign securities are subject to interest rate, currency exchange rate, economic, and political risks. In general, the bond market, especially foreign markets, are volatile, and can decline significantly in response to adverse issuer, political, regulatory, market, or economic developments. Fixed income securities carry interest rate risk [As interest rates rise, bond prices usually fall, and vice versa. This effect is usually more pronounced for longer-term securities.]. Fixed income securities also carry inflation risk, liquidity risk, call risk and credit and default risks for both issuers and counterparties. Unlike individual bonds, most bond funds do not have a maturity date, so avoiding losses caused by price volatility by holding them until maturity is not possible. Foreign securities are subject to interest rate, currency exchange rate, economic, and political risks, all of which may be magnified in emerging markets. Digital assets are speculative and highly volatile, and their market movements are very difficult to predict. Investors also face other risks, including significant and negative price swings, flash crashes, and fraud and cybersecurity risks. Digital assets may also be more susceptible to market manipulation than securities. They can become illiquid at any time and are for investors with a high-risk tolerance. Investors in digital assets could lose the entire value of their investment. Investing involves risk, including risk of loss. Investment decisions should be based on an individual's own goals, time horizon, and tolerance for risk. © Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved. The information contained herein: [1] is proprietary to Morningstar and/or its affiliates; [2] may not be copied or distributed; [3] is not warranted to be accurate, complete, or timely. Neither Morningstar nor its content providers are responsible for any damages or losses arising from any use of this information. Morningstar is a registered trademark of Morningstar, Inc., and is not affiliated with Fidelity Investments. Fidelity Investments® & Pyramid Design is a registered service mark of FMR, LLC. Third-party trademarks and service marks are the property of their respective owners. All other trademarks and service marks are the property of FMR LLC or an affiliated company. Before investing in any exchange traded fund, have your client consider its investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. Contact Fidelity for a prospectus, or a summary prospectus if available, containing this information. Have your client read it carefully. FIDELITY DISTRIBUTORS COMPANY LLC, 900 SALEM STREET, SMITHFIELD, RI 02917 1240462.1.0 Source
Slam The Gavel welcomes back Investigative Journalist, Richard Luthmann. Richard was last on the podcast Season 5, Episode 228. When he was last on, we discussed Family Court cases and Cancel Culture. Today, we discussed Title IV-E funding and children lost and missing in the foster care system in several states, including the 30 children missing in Minnesota. We also talked about how there are no consequences for false claims. Richard also brought up the Paul Boyne and the Taran Nolan case and others. Federal Court issues in regards to Rabbi Belinski were explained. We discussed how advocacy and court watching plays a role in family court issues.To Reach Richard Luthmann: https://linktr.ee/rluthmannSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536 Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetrihttps://www.zazzle.com/store/slam_the_gavel/about*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user/guest should consult with the relevant professionals. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. The content creator maintains the exclusive copyright and any unauthorized copyright usage is strictly prohibited. Podcast is protected by owner from duplication, reproduction, distribution, making a derivative of the work or by owner displaying the podcast. Owner to be held harmless and indemnification. Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/
There's a nasty little provision in the Internal Revenue Code that incentivizes employers to hire foreign students over American citizens. Senator Cotton of Arkansas has introduced a bill to fix this particular problem, but there are thousands more lurking deep in the Internal Revenue Code. The only real fix? Pass the FAIRtax.
This Day in Legal History: Nevada Admitted as 36th StateOn October 31, 1864, Nevada was officially admitted as the 36th state of the United States, a move driven as much by wartime politics as by the territory's readiness for statehood. With President Abraham Lincoln seeking re-election and needing support for the proposed 13th Amendment to abolish slavery, the Republican-controlled Congress saw strategic value in adding another loyal Union state. Although Nevada's population was below the threshold typically required for statehood, its vast mineral wealth and political alignment with the Union helped accelerate the process. To meet the tight timeline ahead of the 1864 election, Nevada's leaders moved quickly to draft a state constitution.Facing logistical challenges in sending the document from Carson City to Washington, D.C., Nevada officials made the unprecedented decision to transmit the entire text—over 16,000 words—via telegraph. The transmission took over 12 hours and cost more than $4,000, making it the longest and most expensive telegram ever sent at the time. The decision proved effective: the telegram reached the capital in time, and Congress formally approved Nevada's admission on the same day.The speed and cost of Nevada's telegraphic constitution became a symbol of the urgency and improvisation of Civil War-era governance. The state's motto, “Battle Born,” reflects both its literal birth during the Civil War and the political battle over slavery and Union preservation. Nevada's admission also helped secure support for Lincoln's re-election and for the 13th Amendment, which passed Congress in January 1865.In a recently disclosed legal filing, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) sought taxpayer information on over 1.28 million individuals from the IRS, though only about 47,000 records matched. The request, part of a broader effort to access data on individuals under final removal orders, was submitted under a carve-out in Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, which permits limited disclosures during criminal investigations. The IRS initially rejected ICE's requests citing legal constraints, but a memorandum of understanding in April allowed for limited data sharing. A subsequent refined request from ICE in June targeted a smaller group of 1.27 million, but again, only a small percentage matched IRS records, and many failed to meet legal standards for processing.The case arose from a lawsuit filed by taxpayer advocacy groups and unions, which argue that these disclosures violate the Tax Reform Act, the Privacy Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. Plaintiffs are seeking a preliminary injunction to halt further sharing. Internal emails reveal IRS officials were concerned about the unprecedented scale and legality of the request, and officials emphasized the need to keep the data sharing confidential. The IRS typically handles about 30,000 such data requests a year, each requiring detailed justification and high-level agency approval. Critics warn that this massive data handover poses urgent threats to taxpayer privacy and due process rights.ICE Sought Records on 1.3 Million Taxpayers, Filing Shows (1)U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols praised two federal prosecutors, Samuel White and Carlos Valdivia, for their handling of a case against Taylor Taranto, despite both being suspended by the Justice Department the day before. The suspension followed their reference to January 6 rioters as “a mob of rioters” and mention of Donald Trump allegedly sharing Barack Obama's address in a sentencing memo. Judge Nichols commended their work as professional and exemplary, stating they upheld the highest prosecutorial standards.Taranto was sentenced to 21 months in prison for firearm and hoax-related charges after being arrested near Obama's D.C. residence in 2023. However, he will not serve additional time due to pretrial detention. Though originally charged for participating in the Capitol riot, those charges were dropped under President Trump's mass clemency order for January 6 defendants issued at the start of his second term. Taranto's defense claimed his statements about explosives were meant as “dark humor” and that he hadn't committed any violence.After White and Valdivia's suspension, a revised sentencing memo—stripped of January 6 and Trump references—was filed by two replacement prosecutors, including a senior DOJ official. The incident reflects broader tensions under the Trump administration, which has repeatedly moved to minimize references to Capitol riot violence and penalize prosecutors involved in politically sensitive cases.US judge praises prosecutors who were suspended after referring to January 6 ‘mob' | ReutersA federal judge allowed the Trump administration to move forward with firing nearly all remaining employees of the Department of Justice's Community Relations Service (CRS), an agency established in the 1960s to mediate racial and ethnic conflicts. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, while denying a temporary restraining order sought by civil rights groups, noted that the plaintiffs failed to show immediate, irreparable harm. However, she also stated that the groups are likely to succeed in proving that the executive branch cannot lawfully dissolve a congressionally created agency.The lawsuit, brought by 11 organizations including the NAACP and the Ethical Society of Police, challenges the Justice Department's recent “reduction in force” that would leave just one CRS employee. The move follows a pattern under the Trump administration, which has rejected all new requests for CRS services and proposed no funding for the agency in its budget. Plaintiffs argue that a termination notice stating the layoffs aim to “effectuate the dissolution” of CRS confirms unlawful intent.Although Talwani's ruling allows the firings to proceed, she emphasized that the final outcome may favor the plaintiffs as the case continues. The layoffs coincide with a government shutdown that began October 1, meaning the employees would have been furloughed regardless. The DOJ claims it is merely reorganizing, not eliminating, the agency, though it concedes that only Congress has the authority to formally abolish it.Judge allows Trump administration to fire most of DOJ race-relations agency's employees | ReutersHagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, a prominent plaintiffs' law firm, is under scrutiny in two high-profile class actions, facing judicial criticism and potential sanctions. In Seattle, a federal judge sanctioned the firm for over $223,000 after finding it misled the court and opposing counsel about its client's withdrawal from an antitrust case against Apple and Amazon. The judge said Hagens Berman failed to disclose that their client, who later disappeared from proceedings, had expressed his intent to exit the case months earlier. The firm argues it acted ethically under client confidentiality rules and has asked the judge to revise her dismissal ruling.In a separate matter in Philadelphia, the firm faces possible new sanctions in long-running litigation over thalidomide-related birth defect claims. A special master found misconduct, including altering an expert report and advancing claims lacking legal merit. While Hagens Berman disputes the findings, calling them outside the master's authority and biased, U.S. District Judge Paul Diamond upheld the report. The firm has now requested that Diamond recuse himself, citing an appearance of bias due to his close coordination with the special master.In both cases, Hagens Berman maintains its actions were in good faith and within legal and ethical bounds, while critics and courts point to patterns of misrepresentation and overreach.Law firm Hagens Berman battles sanctions in Apple, thalidomide cases | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Camille Saint-Saëns.Camille Saint-Saëns was a French composer, organist, conductor, and pianist whose long career spanned the Romantic era and touched the early 20th century. Born in Paris in 1835, he was a child prodigy who began composing at the age of three and gave his first public performance at ten. Saint-Saëns was celebrated for his extraordinary versatility, writing symphonies, concertos, operas, chamber music, and choral works. Though deeply rooted in classical forms, he was an early supporter of contemporary composers like Liszt and Wagner, even as he remained skeptical of more radical modernism. His music often combined technical brilliance with elegance, and his clear, structured style made him a bridge between tradition and innovation. He was also a prolific writer and amateur astronomer, and his intellectual breadth sometimes earned him criticism from those who found his music too refined or academic. Still, Saint-Saëns maintained influence across Europe, and his works remain staples of the concert repertoire.This week's closing theme is Saint-Saëns' Danse Macabre. Originally a song for voice and piano based on a poem by Henri Cazalis, Saint-Saëns later reworked Danse Macabre into a tone poem for orchestra. It depicts Death summoning the dead from their graves at midnight on Halloween for a wild, skeletal waltz. A solo violin—tuned unconventionally to evoke a harsh, eerie sound—plays Death's dance theme, while xylophone rattles mimic clacking bones. The piece was controversial at its premiere in 1875 but quickly became a concert favorite, especially around Halloween. With its vivid orchestration and playful macabre imagery, Danse Macabre is one of classical music's most iconic musical depictions of the supernatural, perfectly capturing the spirit of the season.Without further ado, Saint-Saëns Danse Macabre—enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
Mark has been helping individuals retire with confidence for over two decades. He is a passionate professional with a rich history of providing safe growth and advanced income strategies to help make sure his clients have an income they can't outlive. Working with top estate planning attorneys, Mark assists his clients with life insurance and long-term care planning alternatives to ensure legacy preservation for loved ones.Mark has been in the insurance business since 2000 and has held a Series 65 securities license since 1999. In 2018, Mark founded Wealth Management Strategies Financial Services LLC, an investment advisory and retirement solutions firm. Mark is also an Accredited Investment Fiduciary (AIF), which he earned by demonstrating knowledge of ethical behaviors that follow a fiduciary duty to his clients.Mark attended California State University at Northridge with a major in business management and a minor in marketing.Learn more: https://www.wmsretirementsolutions.com/Investments offered through WMS Financial Services LLC, a California registered investment adviser. AKA “WMSFS”. CRD 291291 8820 E. Foxhollow Drive Anaheim, CA 92808. Insurance products and services are offered through Wealth Management Strategies, an affiliated company. Mark D. Turner, Insurance License #0759815 Wealth Management Strategies, 751 S. Weir Canyon Rd. Ste 157-610 Anaheim, CA 92808 (714) 912-4906. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE. To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any US federal tax advice contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (b) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.Influential Entrepreneurs with Mike Saundershttps://businessinnovatorsradio.com/influential-entrepreneurs-with-mike-saunders/Source: https://businessinnovatorsradio.com/interview-with-mark-turner-aif-on-tax-planning
Mark has been helping individuals retire with confidence for over two decades. He is a passionate professional with a rich history of providing safe growth and advanced income strategies to help make sure his clients have an income they can't outlive. Working with top estate planning attorneys, Mark assists his clients with life insurance and long-term care planning alternatives to ensure legacy preservation for loved ones.Mark has been in the insurance business since 2000 and has held a Series 65 securities license since 1999. In 2018, Mark founded Wealth Management Strategies Financial Services LLC, an investment advisory and retirement solutions firm. Mark is also an Accredited Investment Fiduciary (AIF), which he earned by demonstrating knowledge of ethical behaviors that follow a fiduciary duty to his clients.Mark attended California State University at Northridge with a major in business management and a minor in marketing.Learn more: https://www.wmsretirementsolutions.com/Investments offered through WMS Financial Services LLC, a California registered investment adviser. AKA “WMSFS”. CRD 291291 8820 E. Foxhollow Drive Anaheim, CA 92808. Insurance products and services are offered through Wealth Management Strategies, an affiliated company. Mark D. Turner, Insurance License #0759815 Wealth Management Strategies, 751 S. Weir Canyon Rd. Ste 157-610 Anaheim, CA 92808 (714) 912-4906. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE. To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any US federal tax advice contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (b) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.Influential Entrepreneurs with Mike Saundershttps://businessinnovatorsradio.com/influential-entrepreneurs-with-mike-saunders/Source: https://businessinnovatorsradio.com/interview-with-mark-turner-aif-on-tax-planning
Mark has been helping individuals retire with confidence for over two decades. He is a passionate professional with a rich history of providing safe growth and advanced income strategies to help make sure his clients have an income they can't outlive. Working with top estate planning attorneys, Mark assists his clients with life insurance and long-term care planning alternatives to ensure legacy preservation for loved ones.Mark has been in the insurance business since 2000 and has held a Series 65 securities license since 1999. In 2018, Mark founded Wealth Management Strategies Financial Services LLC, an investment advisory and retirement solutions firm. Mark is also an Accredited Investment Fiduciary (AIF), which he earned by demonstrating knowledge of ethical behaviors that follow a fiduciary duty to his clients.Mark attended California State University at Northridge with a major in business management and a minor in marketing.Learn more: https://www.wmsretirementsolutions.com/Investments offered through WMS Financial Services LLC, a California registered investment adviser. AKA “WMSFS”. CRD 291291 8820 E. Foxhollow Drive Anaheim, CA 92808. Insurance products and services are offered through Wealth Management Strategies, an affiliated company. Mark D. Turner, Insurance License #0759815 Wealth Management Strategies, 751 S. Weir Canyon Rd. Ste 157-610 Anaheim, CA 92808 (714) 912-4906. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any US federal tax advice contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (b) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.Influential Entrepreneurs with Mike Saundershttps://businessinnovatorsradio.com/influential-entrepreneurs-with-mike-saunders/Source: https://businessinnovatorsradio.com/interview-with-mark-turner-president-of-wealth-management-strategies-discussing-retirement-accumulation-vs-distribution
Mark has been helping individuals retire with confidence for over two decades. He is a passionate professional with a rich history of providing safe growth and advanced income strategies to help make sure his clients have an income they can't outlive. Working with top estate planning attorneys, Mark assists his clients with life insurance and long-term care planning alternatives to ensure legacy preservation for loved ones.Mark has been in the insurance business since 2000 and has held a Series 65 securities license since 1999. In 2018, Mark founded Wealth Management Strategies Financial Services LLC, an investment advisory and retirement solutions firm. Mark is also an Accredited Investment Fiduciary (AIF), which he earned by demonstrating knowledge of ethical behaviors that follow a fiduciary duty to his clients.Mark attended California State University at Northridge with a major in business management and a minor in marketing.Learn more: https://www.wmsretirementsolutions.com/Investments offered through WMS Financial Services LLC, a California registered investment adviser. AKA “WMSFS”. CRD 291291 8820 E. Foxhollow Drive Anaheim, CA 92808. Insurance products and services are offered through Wealth Management Strategies, an affiliated company. Mark D. Turner, Insurance License #0759815 Wealth Management Strategies, 751 S. Weir Canyon Rd. Ste 157-610 Anaheim, CA 92808 (714) 912-4906. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any US federal tax advice contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (b) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.Influential Entrepreneurs with Mike Saundershttps://businessinnovatorsradio.com/influential-entrepreneurs-with-mike-saunders/Source: https://businessinnovatorsradio.com/interview-with-mark-turner-president-of-wealth-management-strategies-discussing-retirement-accumulation-vs-distribution
Mark has been helping individuals retire with confidence for over two decades. He is a passionate professional with a rich history of providing safe growth and advanced income strategies to help make sure his clients have an income they can't outlive. Working with top estate planning attorneys, Mark assists his clients with life insurance and long-term care planning alternatives to ensure legacy preservation for loved ones.Mark has been in the insurance business since 2000 and has held a Series 65 securities license since 1999. In 2018, Mark founded Wealth Management Strategies Financial Services LLC, an investment advisory and retirement solutions firm. Mark is also an Accredited Investment Fiduciary (AIF), which he earned by demonstrating knowledge of ethical behaviors that follow a fiduciary duty to his clients.Mark attended California State University at Northridge with a major in business management and a minor in marketing.Learn more: https://www.wmsretirementsolutions.com/Investments offered through WMS Financial Services LLC, a California registered investment adviser. AKA “WMSFS”. CRD 291291 8820 E. Foxhollow Drive Anaheim, CA 92808. Insurance products and services are offered through Wealth Management Strategies, an affiliated company. Mark D. Turner, Insurance License #0759815 Wealth Management Strategies, 751 S. Weir Canyon Rd. Ste 157-610 Anaheim, CA 92808 (714) 912-4906.IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURETo ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any US federal tax advice contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (b) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.Influential Entrepreneurs with Mike Saundershttps://businessinnovatorsradio.com/influential-entrepreneurs-with-mike-saunders/Source: https://businessinnovatorsradio.com/interview-with-mark-turner-president-of-wealth-management-strategies-discussing-retirement-income-planning
Mark has been helping individuals retire with confidence for over two decades. He is a passionate professional with a rich history of providing safe growth and advanced income strategies to help make sure his clients have an income they can't outlive. Working with top estate planning attorneys, Mark assists his clients with life insurance and long-term care planning alternatives to ensure legacy preservation for loved ones.Mark has been in the insurance business since 2000 and has held a Series 65 securities license since 1999. In 2018, Mark founded Wealth Management Strategies Financial Services LLC, an investment advisory and retirement solutions firm. Mark is also an Accredited Investment Fiduciary (AIF), which he earned by demonstrating knowledge of ethical behaviors that follow a fiduciary duty to his clients.Mark attended California State University at Northridge with a major in business management and a minor in marketing.Learn more: https://www.wmsretirementsolutions.com/Investments offered through WMS Financial Services LLC, a California registered investment adviser. AKA “WMSFS”. CRD 291291 8820 E. Foxhollow Drive Anaheim, CA 92808. Insurance products and services are offered through Wealth Management Strategies, an affiliated company. Mark D. Turner, Insurance License #0759815 Wealth Management Strategies, 751 S. Weir Canyon Rd. Ste 157-610 Anaheim, CA 92808 (714) 912-4906.IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURETo ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any US federal tax advice contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (b) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.Influential Entrepreneurs with Mike Saundershttps://businessinnovatorsradio.com/influential-entrepreneurs-with-mike-saunders/Source: https://businessinnovatorsradio.com/interview-with-mark-turner-president-of-wealth-management-strategies-discussing-retirement-income-planning
In this episode of Voices of Otolaryngology, host Rahul K. Shah, MD, MBA, AAO-HNS EVP and CEO, talks with Matthew D. Scarlett, MD, a private practice otolaryngologist in Charleston, South Carolina, and current Chair of the Academy's ENT Political Action Committee (PAC) Board. Dr. Scarlett breaks down how ENT PAC amplifies the voices of otolaryngologists on Capitol Hill, from securing meetings with lawmakers to advancing bills on prior authorization reform, Medicare reimbursement, and newborn CMV screening. Dr. Scarlett shares his personal journey into advocacy—sparked by frustration with barriers to patient care—and explains how ENT PAC strategically supports bipartisan lawmakers who can make a difference for physicians. The discussion highlights how the PAC Board prioritizes issues, the importance of member participation, and how easy actions like responding to “Act Now” alerts can significantly impact legislative outcomes. Whether you're a seasoned ENT or a trainee new to advocacy, this episode demystifies ENT PAC, encourages engagement, and shows how collective action strengthens the specialty's voice in Washington, DC. Resources: AAO-HNS Federal Legislative Advocacy: https://www.entnet.org/advocacy/federal-legislative-advocacy/ Project 535: https://myspecialty.entnet.org/AAOHNS/Project-535/Project-535.aspx Donate to the ENT PAC: https://donation.edonation.com/entpac/website/donate Note: Contributions to ENT PAC are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. Contributions are voluntary, and all members of the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery have the right to refuse to contribution without reprisal. Federal law prohibits ENT PAC from accepting contributions from foreign nationals. By law, if your contributions are made using a personal check or credit card, ENT PAC may use your contribution only to support candidates in federal elections. All corporate contributions to ENT PAC will be used for educational and administrative fees of ENT PAC, and other activities permissible under federal law. Federal law requires ENT PAC use its best efforts to collect and report the name, mailing address, occupation, and the name of the employer of individuals whose contributions exceed $200 in a calendar year. ENT PAC is a program of the AAO-HNS which is exempt from federal income tax under section 501 (c) (6) of the Internal Revenue Code.
In this episode of Voices of Otolaryngology, host Rahul K. Shah, MD, MBA, AAO-HNS/F EVP and CEO, talks with Karen A. Rizzo, MD, a seasoned private practice otolaryngologist and past president of the Pennsylvania Medical Society. Dr. Rizzo, who is also Past Chair of the AAO-HNS Board of Governors, shares her journey from being encouraged by a mentor during residency to representing otolaryngology at the state level and eventually becoming the first otolaryngologist—and only the fifth woman—to lead the nation's oldest state medical society. Dr. Rizzo offers candid insights into why advocacy matters, how to get involved even when it feels intimidating, and the strategies she uses to build relationships with legislators and community leaders. The discussion covers her experiences testifying on scope-of-practice issues, the role of county and state medical societies, and how physicians can start with simple steps like joining local organizations or hosting legislators to make a difference. For otolaryngologists at any career stage, this episode provides an empowering look at how engagement in advocacy not only protects the specialty but also strengthens patient care and professional satisfaction. Resources: AAO-HNS State Legislative Advocacy: https://www.entnet.org/advocacy/state-legislative-advocacy/ Donate to the ENT PAC: https://donation.edonation.com/entpac/website/donate More Ways to Listen: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3UeVLtFdLHDnWnULUPoiin Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/voice-of-otolaryngology/id1506655333 Connect the AAO-HNS: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/aaohns X (Twitter): https://x.com/AAOHNS Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AAOHNS LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-academy-of-otolaryngology/ Website: https://www.entnet.org Shop AAO-HNS Merchandise: https://www.otostore.org Help Us Improve Future Episodes: Share your feedback and topic suggestions at https://forms.office.com/r/0XpA83XNBQ Note: Contributions to ENT PAC are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. Contributions are voluntary, and all members of the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery have the right to refuse to contribution without reprisal. Federal law prohibits ENT PAC from accepting contributions from foreign nationals. By law, if your contributions are made using a personal check or credit card, ENT PAC may use your contribution only to support candidates in federal elections. All corporate contributions to ENT PAC will be used for educational and administrative fees of ENT PAC, and other activities permissible under federal law. Federal law requires ENT PAC use its best efforts to collect and report the name, mailing address, occupation, and the name of the employer of individuals whose contributions exceed $200 in a calendar year. ENT PAC is a program of the AAO-HNS which is exempt from federal income tax under section 501 (c) (6) of the Internal Revenue Code.
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), signed into law July 4, made the opportunity zone (OZ) incentive a permanent part of the Internal Revenue Code. In this episode of the Tax Credit Tuesday podcast, Michael Novogradac, CPA, and Novogradac partner Jason Watkins, CPA, review the changes to OZs instituted by the OBBBA. They explore the Opportunity Zones (OZ) 2.0 Mapping Tool, which Novogradac launched Aug. 19. Novogradac and Watkins also discuss the emphasis on investing in rural areas for the next set of OZs, nominations which begin July 1, 2026. Finally, the pair the new reporting requirements for OZs and the upcoming "dead zone" for investments, which is projected by some to occur next year.
In this episode of Voices of Otolaryngology, host Dr. Rahul Shah sits down with Douglas D. Backous, MD, neurotologist, Immediate Past President of the AAO-HNS/F, and longtime leader in advancing specialty care. Dr. Backous reflects on his diverse career—from academic medicine and private practice to advocacy and international engagement—and how those experiences shape his vision for the future of otolaryngology. He shares lessons learned from leadership roles, including building bridges between clinicians, policymakers, and industry, and his efforts to improve patient access, workforce development, and innovation adoption. The conversation spans everything from Medicare reimbursement challenges to the importance of social trust, the rise of women in the field, and how the Academy can act as a neutral platform for technological advancement and global collaboration. Listeners will gain valuable perspective on the evolving opportunities and challenges facing otolaryngology, and how the Academy is working to ensure the specialty continues to thrive for both practitioners and patients. Resources: Donate to the ENT PAC: https://donation.edonation.com/entpac/website/donate Become a Reg-ent Participant: https://www.reg-ent.org Women in Otolaryngology Section (WIO): https://www.entnet.org/wio/ More Ways to Listen: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3UeVLtFdLHDnWnULUPoiin Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/voice-of-otolaryngology/id1506655333 Connect to the AAO-HNS: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/aaohns X (Twitter): https://x.com/AAOHNS Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AAOHNS LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-academy-of-otolaryngology/ Website: https://www.entnet.org Shop AAO-HNS Merchandise: https://www.otostore.org Help Us Improve Future Episodes: Share your feedback and topic suggestions at https://forms.office.com/r/0XpA83XNBQ Note: Contributions to ENT PAC are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. Contributions are voluntary, and all members of the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery have the right to refuse to contribution without reprisal. Federal law prohibits ENT PAC from accepting contributions from foreign nationals. By law, if your contributions are made using a personal check or credit card, ENT PAC may use your contribution only to support candidates in federal elections. All corporate contributions to ENT PAC will be used for educational and administrative fees of ENT PAC, and other activities permissible under federal law. Federal law requires ENT PAC use its best efforts to collect and report the name, mailing address, occupation, and the name of the employer of individuals whose contributions exceed $200 in a calendar year. ENT PAC is a program of the AAO-HNS which is exempt from federal income tax under section 501 (c) (6) of the Internal Revenue Code.
This Day in Legal History: Eisenhower Signs Act Creating NASAOn July 29, 1958, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the National Aeronautics and Space Act into law, officially creating NASA. The legislation emerged in response to growing Cold War tensions and the Soviet Union's launch of Sputnik the previous year. It marked a pivotal shift in U.S. federal priorities, establishing a civilian-led space agency to coordinate scientific exploration, aeronautics research, and peaceful uses of space. NASA began operations on October 1, 1958, absorbing the earlier National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) and ushering in a new era of government-backed technological ambition.Over the decades, NASA has become a symbol of American innovation, from landing astronauts on the moon to deploying the Hubble Space Telescope. Its work has catalyzed advancements not only in spaceflight, but also in climate science, materials engineering, and telecommunications. The legal framework underpinning NASA reflects a national consensus that science and exploration are critical public goods deserving of federal investment and support.But 67 years later, that consensus is showing strain. Just yesterday, NASA announced that nearly 4,000 employees—about 20% of its workforce—are leaving the agency through the Trump administration's deferred resignation program. This mass exodus follows proposed budget cuts and internal restructuring driven by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a key player in Trump's effort to slash the federal workforce.The timing couldn't be worse. The administration has called for both sweeping workforce reductions and a significant budget cut of nearly 24% for FY 2026, even as it touts long-term funding increases in the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Scientists and space advocates, including The Planetary Society, have criticized the inconsistency, calling it a direct threat to American leadership in space. A group of over 300 NASA employees echoed that concern in a public letter this week, denouncing the changes as "rapid and wasteful" and warning that they jeopardize the agency's mission.What began as a proud moment of bipartisan support for science and exploration now faces a political climate where expertise is undervalued and institutional stability is sacrificed for short-term optics.Nearly 4,000 NASA employees opt to leave agency through deferred resignation programIn her latest appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, Ghislaine Maxwell argues that her 2021 federal sex trafficking conviction should be overturned because it violated a 2007 non-prosecution agreement (NPA) originally struck between Jeffrey Epstein and federal prosecutors in Florida. Maxwell contends that the agreement, which shielded Epstein and his unnamed co-conspirators from federal charges in exchange for his state-level plea, should have also barred her later prosecution in New York. The Justice Department disputes this, saying the NPA applied only to the Southern District of Florida and does not merit Supreme Court review. Maxwell's brief criticizes the DOJ for focusing on Epstein's misconduct rather than the legal scope of the deal, framing the issue as one of government accountability to its promises. The Second Circuit previously upheld her conviction, finding no evidence that the NPA was meant to apply nationally. However, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed a brief supporting Maxwell, arguing that even atypical agreements must be honored if made by the government. Political tensions surrounding the Epstein case continue to complicate matters, as Maxwell recently met with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche amid renewed scrutiny of the Trump administration's handling of Epstein's prosecution. The Supreme Court is expected to consider whether to hear the case in late September.Ghislaine Maxwell Tells Supreme Court Epstein Deal Shielded HerThe Trump administration has filed a judicial misconduct complaint against Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, accusing him of violating judicial ethics by expressing concerns that the administration might defy court rulings, potentially triggering a constitutional crisis. The complaint centers on comments Boasberg allegedly made during a March meeting of the judiciary's policymaking body, which included Chief Justice John Roberts. The Justice Department argues that these remarks, later echoed in his rulings, undermined judicial impartiality—particularly in a case where Boasberg blocked the deportation of Venezuelan migrants using wartime powers under the Alien Enemies Act. The administration claims Boasberg acted on a political bias when he found probable cause to hold it in criminal contempt for defying his deportation order. The DOJ has asked the D.C. Circuit to reassign the case and refer the complaint to a special investigative panel. Boasberg, appointed to the federal bench by President Obama after an earlier nomination to the D.C. Superior Court by President George W. Bush, has not publicly responded. The D.C. Circuit stayed his contempt finding, and a final ruling is still pending.Trump administration files misconduct complaint against prominent judge Boasberg | ReutersThe U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has extended the suspension of 98-year-old Judge Pauline Newman for another year, citing her continued refusal to undergo a full neuropsychological evaluation to assess her fitness to serve. Despite submitting medical reports from her own experts asserting she is mentally competent, the court concluded that those reports were insufficient and contained inaccuracies, including concerns about memory issues and fainting episodes. Newman's legal team criticized the court's swift decision, arguing that their evidence and arguments were not seriously considered following a recent hearing. Newman, a respected patent law jurist appointed by President Reagan in 1984, is the oldest active federal judge who has not taken senior status and has been a prominent dissenter on the Federal Circuit. The court originally suspended her in 2023 after Chief Judge Kimberly Moore raised concerns about her cognitive and physical condition. Newman sued over the suspension, but her case was dismissed; it is now under review by a separate federal appeals court. The latest ruling reaffirms the court's insistence on comprehensive testing before any reconsideration of her judicial role.US appeals court extends suspension of 98-year-old judge in fitness probe | ReutersDonald Trump has asked a federal court to expedite a deposition of Rupert Murdoch in his $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal over a July 17 article linking him to Jeffrey Epstein. The article claimed Trump sent Epstein a 2003 birthday greeting that included a suggestive drawing and cryptic references to shared secrets—allegations Trump calls fabricated. In a court filing, Trump's lawyers said he informed Murdoch before publication that the letter was fake, and Murdoch allegedly responded that he would “take care of it,” which they argue demonstrates actual malice—a necessary legal threshold in defamation cases involving public figures. Trump's team is seeking Murdoch's testimony within 15 days, and Judge Darrin Gayles has ordered Murdoch to respond by August 4. The article's release has intensified political scrutiny of Trump's handling of the Epstein investigation. Legal analysts note Trump faces an uphill battle given the stringent standards for proving defamation, especially against media outlets. Dow Jones, which publishes the Journal, said it stands by its reporting and intends to vigorously defend the case.Trump asks for swift deposition of Murdoch in Epstein defamation case | ReutersMy column for Bloomberg this week argues that the latest shift in federal tax law—the move from the global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) regime to the net controlled foreign corporation tested income (NCTI) system—should push states to reassess their habitual conformity to the Internal Revenue Code. NCTI expands the scope of taxable foreign income for U.S. multinationals, reflecting a broader federal effort to combat base erosion and bolster global competitiveness. But when states automatically conform to these changes—especially through rolling conformity—they risk inheriting complex, federally motivated rules that don't align with their economic interests or legal authority.Rolling conformity is a mechanism by which a state automatically updates its tax code to reflect changes in the federal Internal Revenue Code as they occur, without requiring separate legislative action. While rolling conformity can reduce administrative friction, it's increasingly problematic in an era of aggressive and frequent federal tax rewrites. States adopting NCTI may find themselves without key federal mechanisms like foreign tax credits or Section 250 deductions, exposing them to potential legal challenges over extraterritorial taxation and apportionment. These lawsuits could be expensive, prolonged, and ultimately hinge on issues that federal tax policy has already moved past. I argue that states need to move beyond passive conformity and take an intentional, sovereign approach to tax policy—reviewing conformity statutes now, decoupling where necessary, and preparing to defend their fiscal independence in the face of Washington's rapid policy swings.Trump Tax Law Should Spur States to Split From Federal ‘Pendulum' This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
The best CEOs know how to hold the long-term vision—while building the structure and discipline needed to scale sustainably. That's according to Henry Ward, Founder and CEO of Carta, a networked enterprise resource planning (ERP) platform for private capital markets.In this episode, Henry joins host Rodney Bolden to reflect on his founder journey and the leadership lessons he's learned along the way. They discuss “founder mode,” how the founder mindset evolves as a company grows, and how to manage the tension between innovation and operational rigor within a company. They also cover why more companies are staying private longer and how private companies are offering meaningful equity and liquidity to retain top talent, from early-stage startup to late-stage growth. Follow Invested at Work wherever you listen to or watch podcasts. Visit MorganStanley.com/atwork for more insights on workplace financial benefits. Visit Carta.com to learn more about Henry's work with Carta. Invested at Work is brought to you by Morgan Stanley at Work, hosted by Rodney Bolden. Our executive producers are Fiona Kelsey and Lisa Boyce. Our production partner is Sequel Media Inc. This material is not a solicitation of any offer to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument or to participate in any trading strategy. Guest speakers from outside Morgan Stanley Wealth Management are neither employees of or affiliated with Morgan Stanley Wealth Management. Opinions expressed by such guest speakers are solely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of Morgan Stanley Wealth Management or its affiliates.Morgan Stanley and Carta are not affiliated and this presentation should not be treated as an endorsement of Carta or its products and services. This material may provide the addresses of, or contain hyperlinks to, websites. Morgan Stanley is not implying an affiliation, sponsorship, endorsement with/of the third party or that any monitoring is being done by Morgan Stanley of any information contained within the websites. Except to the extent to which the material refers to website material of Morgan Stanley Wealth Management, the firm has not reviewed the linked site. Equally, except to the extent to which the material refers to website material of Morgan Stanley Wealth Management, the firm takes no responsibility for, and makes no representations or warranties whatsoever as to, the data and information contained therein. Such address or hyperlink (including addresses or hyperlinks to website material of Morgan Stanley Wealth Management) is provided solely for your convenience and information and the content of the linked site does not in any way form part of this document. Accessing such website or following such link through the material or the website of the firm shall be at your own risk and we shall have no liability arising out of, or in connection with, any such referenced website. Morgan Stanley Wealth Management is a business of Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC. Artificial intelligence (AI) is subject to limitations, and you should be aware that any output from an AI-supported tool or service made available by the Firm for your use is subject to such limitations, including but not limited to inaccuracy, incompleteness, or embedded bias. You should always verify the results of any AI-generated output. Private equity funds typically invest in securities, instruments, and assets that are not, and are not expected to become, publicly traded and therefore may require a substantial length of time to realize a return or fully liquidate. They typically have high management, performance and placement fees which can lower the returns achieved by investors. They are often speculative and include a high degree of risk. Investors can lose all or a substantial amount of their investment. They may be highly illiquid with significant lock-up periods and no secondary market, can engage in leverage and other speculative practices that may increase volatility and the risk of loss, and may be subject to large investment minimums. When Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC, its affiliates and Morgan Stanley Financial Advisors and Private Wealth Advisors (collectively, “Morgan Stanley”) provide “investment advice” regarding a retirement or welfare benefit plan account, an individual retirement account or a Coverdell education savings account (“Retirement Account”), Morgan Stanley is a “fiduciary” as those terms are defined under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”), and/or the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”), as applicable. When Morgan Stanley provides investment education, takes orders on an unsolicited basis or otherwise does not provide “investment advice”, Morgan Stanley will not be considered a “fiduciary” under ERISA and/or the Code. For more information regarding Morgan Stanley's role with respect to a Retirement Account, please visit ww.morganstanley.com/disclosures/dol. Tax laws are complex and subject to change. Morgan Stanley does not provide tax or legal advice. Individuals are encouraged to consult their tax and legal advisors (a) before establishing a Retirement Account, and (b) regarding any potential tax, ERISA and related consequences of any investments or other transactions made with respect to a Retirement Account. Morgan Stanley at Work services are provided by wholly owned subsidiaries of Morgan Stanley. Information contained herein is based on data from multiple sources considered to be reliable and Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC (“Morgan Stanley”) makes no representation as to the accuracy or completeness of data from sources outside of Morgan Stanley. © 2025 Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC. Member SIPC. CRC# 4501001 06/2025
Join Kayla Hicks, MD, and Harry DeCabo, AAO-HNS Director for Advocacy, for an essential discussion on advocacy in otolaryngology, exploring why physician and resident engagement in healthcare policy has never been more critical. This episode breaks down the key legislative priorities affecting otolaryngologists and their patients, with a special emphasis on why residents must be active participants in shaping their professional future. Whether you're a resident feeling unsure about advocacy or an established physician wanting to make a difference, this episode demonstrates how otolaryngologists can effectively bridge clinical expertise with legislative decision-making to ensure policies truly serve patients and physicians alike. Resources: ENT Advocacy Network: https://www.entnet.org/the-ent-advocacy-network/ Project 535: https://www.entnet.org/project535 State Tracker Program: https://www.entnet.org/state-trackers ENT PAC: https://www.entpac.org More Ways to Listen: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3UeVLtFdLHDnWnULUPoiin Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/voice-of-otolaryngology/id1506655333 Connect the AAO-HNS: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/aaohns X (Twitter): https://x.com/AAOHNS Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AAOHNS LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-academy-of-otolaryngology/ Website: https://www.entnet.org Shop AAO-HNS Merchandise: https://www.otostore.org Help Us Improve Future Episodes: Share your feedback and topic suggestions at https://forms.office.com/r/0XpA83XNBQ Subscribe to Voices of Otolaryngology for more insights from leading voices in ENT. New episodes released every Tuesday. Note: Contributions to ENT PAC are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. Contributions are voluntary, and all members of the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery have the right to refuse to contribution without reprisal. Federal law prohibits ENT PAC from accepting contributions from foreign nationals. By law, if your contributions are made using a personal check or credit card, ENT PAC may use your contribution only to support candidates in federal elections. All corporate contributions to ENT PAC will be used for educational and administrative fees of ENT PAC, and other activities permissible under federal law. Federal law requires ENT PAC use its best efforts to collect and report the name, mailing address, occupation, and the name of the employer of individuals whose contributions exceed $200 in a calendar year. ENT PAC is a program of the AAO-HNS which is exempt from federal income tax under section 501 (c) (6) of the Internal Revenue Code.
In this case, the court considered this issue: Does a proceeding under 26 U-S-C § 6330 for a pre-deprivation determination about a levy proposed by the Internal Revenue Service to collect unpaid taxes become moot when there is no longer a live dispute over the proposed levy that gave rise to the proceeding?The case was decided on June 12, 2025.The Supreme Court held that the Tax Court lacks jurisdiction under 26 U-S-C §6330 to adjudicate disputes between a taxpayer and the IRS once the IRS is no longer pursuing a levy. Justice Amy Coney Barrett authored the 8-1 majority opinion of the Court.Section 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code grants taxpayers the right to a hearing before the IRS can levy (seize and sell) a taxpayer's property to collect unpaid taxes. At this hearing, a taxpayer can raise issues about the levy, including the existence or amount of the underlying tax liability, and the appeals officer makes a “determination” about whether the levy may proceed. The law then permits review of this “determination” by the Tax Court. The Tax Court's jurisdiction is strictly limited to reviewing the determination whether a levy may go forward, not every dispute considered at the hearing. If there is no longer a proposed or ongoing levy—for example, because the taxpayer's liability has been zeroed out during the pendency of the appeal—there is no determination left to review, and thus, no case or controversy for the Tax Court to resolve under §6330.The reasoning rests on several points: (1) The statutory text and structure focus the collection due process hearing and subsequent Tax Court review on the levy alone; (2) The default rule in tax litigation is that challenges to tax liability must proceed as refund suits after payment, except where specifically authorized exceptions, like the collection due process review, apply; and (3) The statute does not authorize the Tax Court to issue refunds or declaratory judgments unrelated to stopping a levy. Therefore, after the IRS drops the levy because the tax debt has been satisfied, any continuing disputes about liability or overpayment must proceed through a refund suit in district court, not in the Tax Court under §6330.Justice Neil Gorsuch authored a dissenting opinion, arguing that the Tax Court retains jurisdiction over all issues addressed in the IRS's determination—including disputes about underlying tax liability—even after a levy is abandoned, and that stripping jurisdiction in these circumstances creates opportunities for the IRS to evade judicial review and leaves taxpayers without meaningful remedies for erroneous IRS actions.The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.
Lowenstein Sandler's Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation Podcast
In this episode of Just Compensation, Megan Monson and Jessica I. Kriegsfeld talk to Anthony O. Pergola, Vice Chair of Lowenstein's Emerging Companies & Venture Capital practice group, about the complexities and challenges of Section 280G, a section of the Internal Revenue Code which can be implicated during company change-of-control transactions. The hosts discuss tips for navigating Section 280G and planning strategies to mitigate adverse tax consequences, emphasizing the importance of early preparation and clear communication throughout the M&A process. Refer to episode "Change of Control: Golden Parachute Rules in the Sale Process" for a more detailed overview of Section280G. Speakers: Megan Monson, Partner, Executive Compensation, Employment & BenefitsAnthony O. Pergola, Partner, Vice Chair, Emerging Companies & Venture CapitalJessica Kriegsfeld, Associate, Executive Compensation, Employment & Benefits
© 2020-2026 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
