4 ms·
I did acknowledge that. That's why I said they should have worked with the State to resolve the error, rather than ignore it until a seizure was required. Seiz
by Someone1234 7y ago
I did acknowledge that. That's why I said they should have worked with the State to resolve the error, rather than ignore it until a seizure was required.
Seizures are expensive for the state too. If you're working with them on the tax liability (inc. disputing it) they likely aren't going to go the seizure route as a first port of call.
- quaquaqua1 7y agoThere are situations where the mail that the State sends does not properly reach the taxpayer. I suppose if they confiscate the funds and then are open to swift resolution of the error, that's not so bad, but I'm surprised they don't choose wage garnishment or some other way of contacting the taxpayer before just "surprise, the money is ours!"