DocketNumber: Docket Nos. 1350-08, 3931-08, 5031-08.
Citation Numbers: 100 T.C.M. 342, 2010 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 262, 2010 T.C. Memo. 228
Judges: PARIS
Filed Date: 10/20/2010
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/21/2020
Decisions will be entered for respondent.
PARIS,
Some of the facts have been stipulated and are found accordingly. The stipulations of facts and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. Petitioner resided in Norfolk, Virginia, at the time he filed the petitions.
During the tax years at issue petitioner received payments totaling $52,257.21, $83,532.45, and $77,531.13, respectively, for services he performed. Petitioner received Forms W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, for the payments. The Forms W-2 listed the amounts of the payments and the amounts withheld for income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes. Petitioner also received an $849 State tax refund and $10 of interest income in tax year 2004, as well as $14 of interest income in tax year 2005.
Petitioner did not file a Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, for any tax year at issue. *264 during the respective tax year as trust income, (2) a $300 exemption, *265 Respondent prepared substitutes for returns for the tax years at issue pursuant to
Respondent determined that petitioner received taxable wages during the tax years at issue that he failed to report. Under
As a general rule, the person who earns income is taxed on the income.
Petitioner received compensation for services (i.e., wages) during the tax years at issue. He maintained complete dominion and control over the wages before and after his purported transfers to the trusts. Thus, the real economic relationship between the wages and the petitioner did not change. Furthermore, because no trust exists for Federal tax purposes, no fiduciary relationship exists to warrant deductions for fiduciary fees or a trust exemption. See
Respondent also determined, and the Court finds, that petitioner received taxable interest income during tax years 2004 and 2005 that he *268 failed to report. Gross income includes interest income, which generally is fully taxable to the recipient.
Respondent also determined that petitioner received taxable income in tax year 2004 from a state tax refund that he failed to report. A state tax refund is generally taxable to a recipient who deducted the tax for a prior year unless the deduction provided no Federal tax benefit.
Respondent determined that petitioner is liable for an addition to tax under
Respondent maintains that the Forms 1041 petitioner submitted did not constitute valid returns. The Court agrees. A taxpayer must generally use the prescribed form furnished by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to file a tax return. See
The prescribed form for individual income tax returns is Form 1040. Petitioner did not use Forms 1040 for the tax years at issue, and the Forms 1041, regarding income tax for estates and trusts, neither reflected *271 honest and reasonable attempts to comply with the tax law nor provided sufficient data to calculate petitioner's tax liability. Petitioner prepared the Forms 1041 to assign income to a trust and avoid paying tax on wages. To compute petitioner's tax liability on the basis of the Forms 1041, the IRS would have to ignore the line descriptions on the forms, "imagining instead the correct ones from an official Form 1040".
Respondent determined that petitioner is liable for an addition to tax under
Petitioner made no payments of Federal income tax for any tax year at issue other than the amounts withheld. To support an addition to tax for such failure, respondent must produce sufficient evidence that petitioner filed a return showing his tax liability for each tax year at issue. See
Respondent determined that petitioner is liable for an addition to tax under
To hold petitioner liable for this addition to tax, respondent must produce sufficient evidence showing that the addition is appropriate. See
For tax year 2004 petitioner failed to file a return and make required installment payments. He had an actual tax liability for that tax year that he has not paid. Petitioner did file a return for tax year 2003, the preceding tax year, reporting a tax liability of $1,679.00. Thus, respondent has produced sufficient evidence showing that petitioner had a required annual payment for tax year 2004. See
For tax years 2005 and 2006 petitioner failed to file returns and make required installment payments. He had actual tax liabilities for those tax years that he has not paid. Furthermore, petitioner did not file returns for tax years 2004 and 2005, the preceding tax years. Thus, respondent has produced sufficient evidence that petitioner had a required annual payment of estimated tax for tax years 2005 and *276 2006. See
Because respondent met his burden, petitioner is liable for this addition to tax unless a statutorily prescribed exception applies. See
Petitioner does not fit within any exception listed in
To reflect the foregoing and the concessions of the parties,
1. Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended and in effect for the tax years at issue.↩
2. Per respondent's motion, the Court consolidated all three cases.↩
3. Petitioner did file a Federal income tax return for tax year 2003 reporting a tax liability of $1,679.↩
4. Petitioner signed and dated the Forms 1041 for 2004 and 2006 on Nov. 30, 2006, and Dec. 31, 2007, respectively. He did not sign the Form 1041 for 2005.↩
5. A trust required by its governing instrument to distribute all its income in the tax year in which the income is earned is allowed a deduction of $300.
6. For tax year 2004 respondent assessed a $500 penalty against petitioner for filing a frivolous income tax return. See
7. The prohibition on assigning income applies even if the assignor does not have tax avoidance as a motive for the assignment. See
8. The Court need not address petitioners' assertion that the Forms 1041 were valid trust agreements. Even if they were, they would still lack economic substance and constitute shams for Federal tax purposes. See
9. Petitioner also contends that he does not owe any tax because he has "rendered all tribute that the scripture (commonly referred to as the [H]oly[B]ible) requires * * * [him] to render." Petitioner is not exempt from income taxes on religious or moral grounds. See
10. The tax consists of the individual's income and selfemployment tax.
11. In other words, an underpayment occurs if the required installment payment exceeds any actual installment payment(s) paid on or before the required installment payment's due date.
12. If the individual's adjusted gross income shown on the preceding tax year's return exceeds $150,000, a higher percentage may apply.
13. The tax years at issue are 2004, 2005, and 2006. Thus, the tax years that qualify as preceding tax years are 2003, 2004, and 2005, respectively.↩
la-verne-schulz-and-barbara-schulz-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue-la , 686 F.2d 490 ( 1982 )
Markosian v. Commissioner , 73 T.C. 1235 ( 1980 )
Betty Jean Capps v. Roscoe Eggers, Commissioner of Internal ... , 782 F.2d 1341 ( 1986 )
Helvering v. Horst , 61 S. Ct. 144 ( 1940 )
United States v. Lee , 102 S. Ct. 1051 ( 1982 )
Hernandez v. Commissioner , 109 S. Ct. 2136 ( 1989 )
Commissioner v. Lane-Wells Co. , 64 S. Ct. 511 ( 1944 )
Clarence H. O'DOnnell and Georgia G. O'DOnnell v. ... , 726 F.2d 679 ( 1984 )
Wallace J. Vnuk and Frances R. Vnuk v. Commissioner of ... , 621 F.2d 1318 ( 1980 )
United States v. Robert R. Romero , 640 F.2d 1014 ( 1981 )
Wheeler v. Commissioner , 521 F.3d 1289 ( 2008 )
Robert D. Beard v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue , 793 F.2d 139 ( 1986 )
United States v. Basye , 93 S. Ct. 1080 ( 1973 )
Commissioner v. Banks , 125 S. Ct. 826 ( 2005 )
Lucas v. Earl , 50 S. Ct. 241 ( 1930 )
Irvine K. Furman and Lorena K. Furman v. Commissioner of ... , 381 F.2d 22 ( 1967 )
George v. Zmuda and Walburga Zmuda v. Commissioner of ... , 731 F.2d 1417 ( 1984 )
Frank T. Olsen and Lois E. Olsen v. Commissioner of ... , 709 F.2d 278 ( 1983 )
merle-e-parker-the-foundation-for-divine-meditation-incorporated-v , 365 F.2d 792 ( 1966 )
Eugene M. Lonsdale, Sr. And Patsy R. Lonsdale v. ... , 661 F.2d 71 ( 1981 )