DocketNumber: Docket No. 15477-81.
Citation Numbers: 42 T.C.M. 1363, 1981 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 163, 1981 T.C. Memo. 582
Filed Date: 10/5/1981
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/20/2020
MEMORANDUM OPINION
DAWSON,
OPINION OF THE SPECIAL*164 TRIAL JUDGE
CANTREL,
Respondent, in his notice of deficiency issued to petitioner on March 31, 1981, determined deficiencies in petitioner's Federal income tax for the taxable calendar years 1977 and 1978 as follows:
Year | Income Tax |
1977 | $ 45,383.00 |
1978 | 18,920.00 |
Respondent's deficiency determinations are predicated upon the following items which were claimed on the 1977 and 1978 returns and disallowed:
1977 | 1978 | |
Turnkey expenses | $ 80,351.00 | |
Farm loss | 2,634.00 | $ 3,755.00 |
Schedule "C" loss | 6,019.00 | |
Excess itemized deductions | 569.00 | |
Bad debts | 2,000.00 | 3,000.00 |
Petitioner, who operated a dental service, resided at Las Vegas, Nevada, on the date he filed his petition. He filed individual U.S. Federal income tax returns for 1977 and 1978 with the Internal Revenue Service.
Rule 34(b) provides in pertinent part that the petition*165 in a deficiency action shall contain "clear and concise assignments of each and every error which the petitioner alleges to have been committed by the Commissioner in the determination of the deficiency or liability"
It is clear beyond doubt that the constitutional arguments advanced by petitioner are frivolous. All of the contentions he has raised have been fully discussed (adversely to petitioner's contentions) in numerous prior opinions of this and other courts. See, e.g.,
Finally, while it may be somewhat repetitious, the following recent forewarning in
It may be appropriate to note further that this Court has been flooded with a large number of so-called tax protester cases in which thoroughly meritless issues have been raised in, at best, misguided reliance upon lofty principles. Such cases tend to disrupt the orderly conduct of serious litigation in this Court, and the issues raised therein are of the type that have been consistently decided against such protesters and their contentions often characterized as frivolous. The time has arrived when the Court should deal summarily and decisively with such cases without engaging in scholarly discussion of the issues or attempting to soothe the feelings of the petitioners by referring to the supposed*167 "sincerity" of their wildly espoused positions. 4
On this record petitioner has not stated a claim upon which this Court can grant any relief. Hence, we must and do grant respondent's motion.
1. Since this is a pretrial motion and there is no genuine issue of material fact, the Court has concluded that the post-trial procedures of
2. All rule references herein are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.↩
3. See
4. In this respect, see also