DocketNumber: Docket No. 28945-91
Filed Date: 3/11/1993
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/20/2020
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PARR, Additions To Tax Year Deficiency Sec. 6651 Sec. 6653(a)(1)(A) Sec. 6654 Sec. 6661 1987 $ 14,906 $ 3,727 $ 745 $ 3,727 1988 13,120 3,280 656 $ 838 3,280 Sec. 6662 1989 7,761 1,940 583 $ 1,552
Additionally, 50 percent of the interest due on the entire deficiency pursuant to sec. 6653(a)(1)(B) for taxable year 1987.
The adjustments giving rise to the deficiencies and additions to tax are based upon petitioner's failure to file Federal income tax returns and*84 report income from self-employment.
Petitioner resided in Mountain View, California, at the time his petition was filed.
On December 11, 1991, petitioner filed a petition in which he disputed all of the deficiencies and additions to tax by asserting in paragraph 4: The determination of tax set forth in the said notice of deficiency is based upon the following: Devious search and 'seizure' of my financial information. On May 6, 1986 it was brought to my attention that INFORMATION, PRIVACY and PRACTICE ACTS (which circumvent the
Petitioner did not deny, nor attempt to defend himself against, the allegations set forth in respondent's*85 notice of deficiency. Rule 34(b) states in pertinent part that "The petition in a deficiency or liability action shall contain * * * (4) 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." The Rule also states: "Any issue not raised in the assignment of errors shall be deemed to be conceded."
Petitioner failed to assert in his petition any justiciable errors of law or fact in respondent's notice. He is therefore deemed to have conceded the issues raised in the notice.
Petitioner claims that the reporting of financial information by a State agency to the Internal Revenue Service is an illegal search and seizure. This claim is patently frivolous and we will not dignify it with additional ink. Cf.
Moreover, courts have repeatedly held that the
This is the third such case filed by petitioner in this Court which amounts to nothing more than a spurious claim "couched in terms of a constitutional challenge."
Accordingly, we find that petitioner is liable for the tax and additions to tax in the amounts shown on the notice of deficiency.
Tax protester arguments such as these asserted by petitioner have been consistently held to be subject to the sanctions provided in section 6673. Section 6673(a)(1) states, in pertinent part, that whenever it appears that the taxpayer's position in such proceeding is frivolous or groundless the Tax Court may require the taxpayer to pay to the United States a penalty.
This lawsuit is the third frivolous case that petitioner has filed with this Court, each with identical petitions claiming a constitutional objection. In the previous actions, the Court declared*87 petitioner's claims to be without merit or substance, frivolous. These cases were subsequently dismissed by Court Orders. *88 frivolous cases not in excess of $ 25,000. Accordingly, we find a penalty in the amount of $ 5,000 awarded to the United States appropriate.
To reflect the foregoing,
1. All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, and all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the years in issue, unless otherwise indicated.↩
2. See