My Life Blog

If you are a "Lost" viewer, you will relate to this.

There was a moment in a recent episode where two characters give each other knowing looks as one suggests to the other that an injury won’t take as long to heal.  The remark was made by a woman who is sure her cancer has been purged.  The remark was meant for a man who arrived on the island in a wheelchair, but walks freely.  Thus there is this mysterious healing power of the island. 

And such is how Suzanne and I feel about Kauai…our island.  I bring this up because we are due to be on the island yet again in less than three weeks.  And not a moment too soon for both of us.  I am in the midst of one of the most challenging and unrewarding periods in my career and bathe daily in a swirl of milky stress.  Suzanne has been less encumbered by her job, but feels the residuals of a rear-end accident from last October which still isn’t settled.  We collectively are worn out from our first eight months of bringing our two homes together…very rewarding, but tiring nonetheless.

So it is with great anticipation that we await our trip to the island.  We fully anticipate the healing process to begin immediately.  Unfortunately, unlike our favorite TV-based islanders, we will not be able to stay indefinitely and enjoy the continuing healing benefits.  But we will feel sad about that only upon return. 

Without going into the details, let me just say that the IRS and I have a disagreement on my 2003 tax return.  Its a minor one, really, but the experience is frustrating me.

The process began with a "Note of Deficiency" sometime in December…right around Christmas Day, actually.  After reading it, I could see what their concern was and why things weren’t quite clear on the return.  So I put a thorough paper trail together and wrote a very clear cover letter.  In addition, they also provided a form which had likely reasons for the deficiency.  My reason was among them, so I checked the appropriate box.

In early March, I received a confirmation from the IRS that they had received my letter and that a decision would be made by March 27th. 

Yesterday, we received a notice that a registered letter awaited us.  Today I picked it up and it was a note from the IRS detailing a "Note of Deficiency".  There is no explanation as to why my case was denied, just several pages detailing how I can pay the amount owed. 

Folks, this is a small amount of money.  Very immaterial given some things that you hear today.  But anyway, I think I’m right, so am reluctant to pay just because the IRS is intimidating.  Because I feel the need to understand how I am wrong, I’m going to have to call them to get the details that they should have provided in this latest mailing.  Thus I’m going to be wasting additional taxpayer money as I occupy some IRS specialist to help me understand this.

I’m just a little frustrated because I pay my taxes on time and honestly and when asked have provided a thorough explanation for an exceptional condition.  And yet the IRS cannot provide the same courtesy back.

UPDATE:  I called the IRS today to discuss my case.  It appears that the registered letter that I received kicked out of their system automatically because the case was not settled and has 90 days to go.  However, I discovered that my case has not been assigned to anyone and that they have no record of my response.  This is disconcerting since I have a written reply from them acknowledging my response along with an advisement that they will respond by 3/27.  They have asked me to fax in my response again since the original is apparently lost.  This explains the lack of explanation within the registered letter, however if I were the passive type, I would have accepted that I had lost the case and just paid the amount due.

I started the week by reporting for jury duty promptly at 8am on Monday.  Well, perhaps not so promptly as a wreck caused me to be 15 minutes late.  No worries, after reporting in, I sat for 2.5 hours until I was finally assigned to a panel.  Once assigned, I made my way up to the court where I waited another 45 minutes before we finally filed into the court.

I was amused and appalled at the creative excuses everyone was giving to try to influence the attorneys to disfavor them from the jury.  I was straight-forward and honest and as I sat as panelist #2, I was sure I’d be picked.  As luck would have it, they skipped right over me, so I only lost one day to the experience.

I actually don’t mind serving for jury duty.  I’m intrigued by watching the legal system work.  As long as my view of the process is from the outside, as in not a principal in the case, I’m fine with it.  This case was a theft case, the guy was accused of stealing between $100,000 and $200,000 from a Subway business.  Apparently, computers involved, as the attorneys asked many questions of us panelists to try to ascertain how we felt about computers.  Some representative questions were, "Have you generally had positive experiences with computers?"…"Are computers always correct?"  I never had to answer any of those directly, so I was spared having to provide a characteristic overly-long reply.  Given the way work has been lately, I’m not sure how my answers would have gone.

Some of the exemption excuses tendered to the court were, "I have bladder control problems"…"I was robbed on Thursday and my husband had a stroke yesterday"…"My brother was accused of stealing baseball cards, so I might have a bias"…"I don’t feel good and its getting worse"…"I have travel plans on Friday".  Those are just a few, and no, the bladder control problem was not mine.

Others thought the defendant was already guilty based upon his presence in the court.  The presumption of innocence is apparently a concept that attorneys cannot take for granted by prospective jurors. 

When the computer questions were being asked, the attorneys targeted certain people with direct questions.  Most appeared to have computer-related occupations.  Strangely, I was left out.  As I considered why, I surmised that my listed occupation of "Application Architect" probably was interpreted by the attorneys as that I probably build buildings.

It was not an unpleasant experience, just a bit inefficient.  The court system needs to figure out how to progress things a bit quicker, I think.  Thankfully, I brought two books to read while I waited.  In addition, I’m looking forward to my $6 check, but sadly, it cost me $3 to park and $6 for lunch.   But at least I did my civic duty and was willing to be selected if that were the desire of the court.