Stronger language. Legal arguments. Threats. That instinct destroys position
Failed to add items
Add to basket failed.
Add to Wish List failed.
Remove from Wish List failed.
Follow podcast failed
Unfollow podcast failed
Stronger language. Legal arguments. Threats. That instinct destroys position
-
Narrated by:
-
By:
About this listen
Most people think escalation means pushing harder. Stronger language. Legal arguments. Threats. That instinct destroys position. Escalation on paper is not argument. It’s memorialization. A proper escalation letter does only three things: It records what was asked. It records what was not answered. And it records that enforcement continued anyway. Nothing more. No new facts. No legal theories. No rights claims. No accusations. Because the moment you argue, you cure the agency’s defects. A correct escalation letter never says: “You have no authority.” “You lack jurisdiction.” “I don’t owe this.” Those are conclusions. And conclusions collapse structure. Instead, it simply records: Authority was requested — none provided. Jurisdiction was questioned — none established. Obligation was requested — no law identified. Action occurred anyway. That’s it. The power of escalation is not force. It’s restraint. You don’t advance their case. You don’t supply missing elements. You preserve unresolved authority in the record — formally. That’s escalation. Not confrontation. Not resistance. Next, we’ll walk through a real IRS example — and show how most people ruin it without realizing it.....
YesToHellWith
Get full access to YesToHellWith at yestohellwith.substack.com/subscribe