6/10/09, IRS replies to Daniel Mahnke on CDP Hearing.
Here the IRS still has NOT resolved the matter to make a decision for what is actually owed for the year 2002, even 6 months after the return was filed.

5/18/09, Daniel Mahnke replies to an IRS Notice of Lien.
Here I, Daniel Mahnke, write to the IRS to request a Collection Due Process Hearing. The amount shown for 2001 plus the garnished wages already sent is around $3,000 less the amount from the Notice of Levy, yet no change for the year 2002.

5/18/09, Daniel Mahnke notifies Swift Transportation of new Federal Form W-4.
Here I, Daniel Mahnke, write to Swift Transportation to increase the amount to take home, yet all they do is add the withholding of only federal taxes for 2009.
     This IRS form is what Swift sent me with the copy of Notice of Levy, yet disregard it completely for 3 allowances on new W-4.
     This is the earnings statement Swift provided me with the 1st federal withholding after the new W-4, yet NO additional take home pay.

4/21/09, California Franchise Tax Board gives a refund for the 2001 tax year.
Here I, Daniel Mahnke, receive a letter from the Califonia FTB stating a refund for the year 2001 which they hand over to the IRS for the year 2002, is for the recent filing of the 2001 and 2002 tax returns. So they must agree that my tax returns are correct and I don't owe over $8,000 to the IRS and therefore don't owe possibly $1,000 to California.

3/28/09, Daniel Mahnke notifies authorities of Swift Transportation's possible Tax Fraud.
Here I, Daniel Mahnke, write to government officials to halt the actions by Swift Transportation to increase the amounts on the W-2's for employees and 1099's for Owner Operators from what they are actually paid. This just transfers the burden of payment of the income tax to the employee.

3/2/09, Judge Manuel L. Real dismisses case in favor of Swift Transportation.
Judge Manuel L. Real disregards Sections 7608(a), 6331(a), and 7403(a), as well as others. He has just mandated myself, Daniel Mahnke, by his actions to have the full $33,746 of wages garnished prior to me taking any actions to get any refund from the IRS. This makes a Judge require an individual to pay a 597% income tax rate for the year 2002.

3/3/09, Swift Transportation Commits Tax Fraud on Daniel Mahnke's W-2.
Here Swift Transportation has reported an extra $54.15 of earnings on each of my Federal Form W-2's over the amount posted on my Earnings Statements for the years 2007 and 2008. Additional Subtitle C taxes were withheld as well. I also have to pay more in taxes because of this. This was presented in front of Judge Manuel L. Real, but was rejected as an exclusive IRS matter.

2/16/09, IRS's notice of overpayment for Daniel Mahnke's 2001 tax return.
Here the IRS applied an additional overpayment of $375.02 on my tax return for the year 2001 to the year 2001, which would increase my payment for other years if the garnishment continues to the full amount.

2/9/09, IRS's notice of overpayment for Daniel Mahnke's 2001 tax return.
Here the IRS divided up the garnished wages already received to apply them to the years 1998 and 1999 for the civil penalties of frivolous amended returns, and for the year 2001 for a 1040A return, not the 1040 normal return. 'NO' Notice of Levy was issued for the years 1998 and 1999, yet the wages garnished for the years 2001 and 2002 was applied to those previous years. Compounded interest was denied to be refunded on the amount of $2,310 in overpayment of 2001 taxes with the IRS reporting only $1,425.04 in overpayment, a difference of $885 as well.
NOTE: The same notice for overpayment for the tax year 2002 has yet to arrive as the IRS wants ALL the garnished wages before they declare any overpayment for 2002.

2/4/09, Letter to Judge Real.
Here I have sent to Judge Real the upgraded version of the lawsuit plus the tax returns.

1/23/09, IRS's notice of receiving Daniel Mahnke's 2002 tax return.
Here the IRS cannot resolve the matter immediately on $32,644 of stock sales in 2002 that would reduce the payment of taxes from $6,586 to only $229, as the stock purchases were denied, yet the garnishment still continues.

1/22/09, Snell and Wilmer L.L.P., attorneys for Swift Transportation issue documents.
     Here the Swift attorneys issue Notice of Motion to Dismiss.
     Here the Swift attorneys issue Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion to Dismiss.
     Here the Swift attorneys issue Declaration of James Fry.
     Here the Swift attorneys issue Certification and Notice of Interested Parties.
     Here the Swift attorneys issue Notice of Related Cases.

1/5/09, IRS's notice of overpayment for Daniel Mahnke's 1997 tax return.
Here the IRS applied the overpayment of $237.19 on my tax return for the year 1997 because I sent in an amended 'zero' return and the IRS applied it to the year 2001, which would increase my payment for other years if the garnishment continues to the full amount.

12/3/08, Daniel Mahnke's 2002 1040 tax return.
Here the CPA reports taxable income of only $2,277, and a tax of $229, with overpayment of $6,357.

6/2/04, IRS's 2002 assessment.
Here the IRS reports taxable income of $37,921, and a tax of $6,586.

12/3/08, Daniel Mahnke's 2001 1040 tax return.
Here the CPA reports taxable income of only $37,444, and a tax of $6,911, with overpayment of $2,310.

6/2/04, IRS's 2001 assessment.
Here the IRS reports taxable income of $45,817, and a tax of $9,221.

11/20/08, Daniel Mahnke files a lawsuit against his employer.
Here is the newer version filed on 28 lined paper.

9/30/08, IRS's Notice of Levy for years 2001 and 2002.
Here the IRS issues the Notice of Levy of $33,746.28 to a private citizen which at the top of page 2 you can see paragraph (a) is missing from Section 6331 as it applies to only government employees.
TITLE 26--INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
  Subtitle F--Procedure and Administration
   CHAPTER 64--COLLECTION
    Subchapter D--Seizure of Property for Collection of Taxes
     PART II--LEVY
Sec. 6331. Levy and distraint
(a) Authority of Secretary
  If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same within 10 days after notice and demand, it shall be lawful for the Secretary to collect such tax (and such further sum as shall be sufficient to cover the expenses of the levy) by levy upon all property and rights to property (except such property as is exempt under section 6334) belonging to such person or on which there is a lien provided in this chapter for the payment of such tax. Levy may be made upon the accrued salary or wages of any officer, employee, or elected official, of the United States, the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of the United States or the District of Columbia, by serving a notice of levy on the employer (as defined in section 3401(d)) of such officer, employee, or elected official. If the Secretary makes a finding that the collection of such tax is in jeopardy, notice and demand for immediate payment of such tax may be made by the Secretary and, upon failure or refusal to pay such tax, collection thereof by levy shall be lawful without regard to the 10-day period provided in this section.

8/18/08, Letter about another IRS agent seeking action on Daniel Mahnke.
IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS 'NO' EXCUSE!
Here I send out a letter to government officials about another IRS agent seeking action against me for the years 2003-2005 for which I mention she has NO jurisdiction.
COMPLIANCE OF CONGRESSIONAL LAW IS MANDATORY!
U.S. SUPREME COURT RULED IN 1921; THE DEFINITION OF 'INCOME' IS A CORPORATE PROFIT!
LOWER COURT JUDGES HAVE OVERTURNED THESE DECISIONS IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND THEIR OATH!