Appeal of P.S. Docket No. 36/111 -- ALAN HAMMER d/b/a GOD & SON

 In the Matter of the Complaint Against: 

 ALAN HAMMER d/b/a GOD & SON,
 P.O. Box 5122,
 at
 Norman, OK  73070-5122

 P.S. Docket No. 36/111

 12/27/90

 Cohen, James A., Judicial Officer

 APPEARANCE FOR COMPLAINANT:  H. Richard Hefner, Esq.,
 G. Scott Morrell, Esq., Consumer Protection Division,
 Law Department, United States Postal Service, Washington, DC  20260-1144 

 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:  Alan Hammer,
 P.O. Box 5122, Norman, OK  73070-5122

POSTAL SERVICE DECISION Respondent has filed an appeal from an Initial Decision of an Administrative Law Judge which found that Respondent is engaged in conducting a scheme or device for obtaining money or property through the mail by means of materially false representations in violation of 39 U.S.C. § 3005. Respondent's appeal letter contends that the Initial Decision is in error. Complainant has filed a timely reply to Respondent's appeal in which it requests that the Initial Decision be affirmed and that the orders authorized by 39 U.S.C. § 3005, and recommended in the Initial Decision, be issued.

Discussion and Conclusions

Respondent challenges the Administrative Law Judges's findings that the representations made in his solicitations are false. Specifically, Respondent asserts that, contrary to the allegations of the Complaint and the findings of the Initial Decision, (1) God & Son is a tax exempt organization holding tax exempt number one; (2) persons contributing money to God & Son may legally claim income tax deductions of 1,000% of their contributions; (3) such deductions may be claimed in the current, past or future years; and (4) persons contributing ten percent of their taxable income to Respondent can legally avoid payment of any taxes. Complainant contends that the falsity of these representations is supported by the record.

The finding that these representations are false was based on testimony and documents introduced by Complainant at a hearing before the Administrative Law Judge (Initial Decision (I.D.) at 2). The evidence presented at that hearing establishes that Respondent's organization is not registered with the Internal Revenue Service and that contributions to it are not tax deductible (I.D., Finding of Fact 5). The evidence also establishes that there is no provision in the Internal Revenue Code for a charitable deduction of 1,000% of the amount contributed (id.). Since contributions are not 1,000% deductible and Respondent is not tax exempt, the representation that contributions to Respondent of ten percent of a contributor's taxable income will result in zero tax liability is false (id.). Finally, the evidence establishes that contributions are deductible in the year in which they are made but may not be claimed in future years (id). The evidence does not establish that tax deductions for charitable contributions may not be taken in prior years. However, since contributions to Respondent are not deductible, they may not be claimed in any previous year.

Respondent has provided no evidence, either before the Administrative Law Judge or on appeal to the Judicial Officer, to support his assertion that the representations made in his solicitations are true. Neither has Respondent presented any reason to question the evidence presented by Complainant which establishes the falsity of those representations. Accordingly, Respondent's appeal is denied and the Initial Decision is affirmed. The orders sought in the Complaint and authorized by 39 U.S.C. § 3005 are issued with this Decision.