Decision will be entered under
MARVEL,
Additions to tax | ||||
Year | Deficiency | |||
2004 | $16,577 | $3,730 | $4,144 | $163 |
2005 | 24,141 | 5,432 | 5,552 | 968 |
2006 | 24,488 | 5,510 | 4,163 | 1,159 |
2008 | 21,280 | 2,879 | 640 | 381 |
The issues for decision are: (1) whether petitioner had unreported compensation income for each of the years at issue; (2) whether petitioner had unreported cancellation of indebtedness income for 2004; and (3) whether petitioner is liable for additions to tax under
Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so 2012 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 179">*180 found. The stipulation of facts is incorporated herein by this reference. Petitioner resided in Alabama when he filed his petition.
Petitioner has two associate's degrees, one in finance and one in business. During the years at issue petitioner was employed by, and received payment from, various companies. The companies issued to respondent information returns reporting payments made to petitioner during 2004-06 and 2008.
For 2004 respondent received the following information returns with respect to petitioner: (1) a Form 1099-MISC, Miscellaneous Income, from Showroom Controls, Inc. (Showroom), reporting nonemployee compensation of $40,277; (2) a Form 1099-MISC from Beacon Industries, Inc. (Beacon Industries), reporting nonemployee compensation of $6,438; (3) a Form 1099-MISC from KSSD, Inc. (KSSD), reporting nonemployee compensation of $11,202; and (4) a Form 1099-C, Cancellation of Debt, from Bank of America, reporting cancellation of indebtedness income of $732.
For 2005 respondent received the following information returns with respect to petitioner: (1) a Form 1099-MISC from Showroom reporting nonemployee compensation of $73,299; and (2) a Form 1099-MISC from Beacon 2012 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 179">*181 Industries reporting nonemployee compensation of $5,331.
For 2006 respondent received the following information returns with respect to petitioner: (1) a Form 1099-MISC from Showroom reporting nonemployee compensation of $64,918; (2) a Form 1099-MISC from Automotive Lease Guide (ALG), Inc. (ALG), reporting nonemployee compensation of $2,394; (3) a Form 1099-MISC from Dent Zone Marketing Group, Inc. (Dent Zone), reporting nonemployee compensation of $2,668; (4) a Form 1099-MISC from Beacon Industries reporting nonemployee compensation of $2,357; and (5) a Form 1099-MISC from WiredLogic, Inc., d.b.a. Dealerwire (WiredLogic), reporting nonemployee compensation of $7,732.
For 2008 respondent received the following information returns with respect to petitioner: (1) a Form 1099-MISC from Showroom reporting nonemployee compensation of $1,400; (2) a Form 1099-MISC from eXteres Corp. (eXteres) reporting nonemployee compensation of $2,000; (3) a Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, from JM Dealer Services, Inc. (JM Dealer Services), reporting wages of $100,985; and (4) a Form 5498-SA, HSA, Archer MSA, or Medicare Advantage MSA Information, from JP Morgan Chase Bank, reporting future contributions 2012 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 179">*182 of $2,362.
On August 21, 2008, respondent received petitioner and his wife's joint Forms 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, for 2004-06. On June 1, 2009, respondent received petitioner and his wife's joint Form 1040 for 2008. On the Forms 1040 petitioner listed his occupation as "American Citizen". On each of the Forms 1040 petitioner reported taxable income of zero.
Petitioner attached to his 2004 Form 1040 self-prepared revised Forms 1099-MISC on behalf of Beacon Industries, KSSD, and Showroom. On each of these Forms 1099-MISC petitioner reported he received zero nonemployee compensation. Petitioner also attached a self-prepared revised Form 1099-C on behalf of Bank of America, on which he reported that Bank of America canceled zero debt.
Petitioner attached to his 2005 Form 1040 self-prepared revised Forms 1099-MISC on behalf of Beacon Industries and Showroom. On each of these Forms 1099-MISC for 2005 petitioner reported he received zero nonemployee compensation.
Petitioner attached to his 2006 Form 1040 self-prepared revised Forms 1099-MISC on behalf of Dent Zone, ALG, Beacon Industries, WiredLogic, and Showroom. On each of these Forms 1099-MISC 2012 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 179">*183 for 2006 petitioner reported he received zero nonemployee compensation.
Petitioner attached to his 2008 Form 1040 a self-prepared revised Form 1099-MISC on behalf of eXteres. On that Form 1040, petitioner reported that he received zero nonemployee compensation. Petitioner also attached a Form 4852, Substitute for Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, or Form 1099-R, Distributions From Pensions, Annuities, Retirement or Profit-Sharing Plans, IRAs, Insurance Contracts, etc., on behalf of JM Dealer Services. 2 On the Form 4852 petitioner reported that JM Dealer Services withheld Federal income tax of $8,485, State income tax of $4,266, Social Security tax of $6,261, and Medicare tax of $1,464. Petitioner also attached a Form 8889, Health Savings Accounts, on which he reported employer contributions of $1,350 for 2008.
On each of the self-prepared revised Forms 1099-MISC for 2004-06 and 2008 petitioner 2012 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 179">*184 included the following: 3 Note: This corrected Form 1099-MISC is submitted to rebut a document known to have been submitted by the party identified above as "PAYER", which erroneously alleges a payment to the party identified above as the "RECIPIENT" of "gains, profit or income" made in the course of a "trade or business". Under penalty of perjury, I declare that I have examined this statement and to the best of my knowledge and belief, it is true, correct, and complete.
On April 30, 2010, respondent issued to petitioner notices of deficiency for the years at issue. On the basis of the third-party information returns respondent determined that petitioner had unreported taxable income for 2004-06 and 2008. For 2004 respondent determined that petitioner failed to report nonemployee compensation of $57,917 and cancellation of indebtedness income of $732. For 2005 respondent determined that petitioner failed to report nonemployee compensation of $78,630. For 2006 respondent determined that petitioner failed to report nonemployee compensation of $80,069. For 2008 respondent 2012 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 179">*185 determined that petitioner failed to report nonemployee compensation of $3,400 and wages of $100,985. Respondent also determined that petitioner was liable for additions to tax under
On August 4, 2010, petitioner filed a petition with this Court contesting respondent's determinations in the notices of deficiency. In his petition, petitioner contended that respondent relied on "purported information returns which * * * were not created by a lawful payers * * * were not sent to a lawful recipient * * * mischaracterize payments as reportable income * * * mischaracterize payments as taxable income." We set this case for trial at the trial session beginning April 26, 2011, in Mobile, Alabama. At trial we warned petitioner that if he continued to assert frivolous or groundless positions, this Court would consider imposing a penalty under
Ordinarily, the Commissioner's determinations in a notice of deficiency are presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving that the determinations are erroneous.
Petitioner does not contend that
Under
As noted above, the Commissioner's deficiency determination is normally entitled to a presumption of correctness.
To satisfy his initial burden of production, respondent introduced into evidence Forms 1099-MISC, a Form 1099-C, and a Form W-2. The records that respondent introduced indicate that petitioner received nonemployee compensation, wages, and cancellation of indebtedness income during the years at issue in the amounts set forth in the 2012 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 179">*190 notices of deficiency. In addition, petitioner admitted that he provided services and received compensation during the years at issue. We conclude that respondent laid the requisite minimal evidentiary foundation for the contested unreported income adjustments and that respondent's determinations of tax due are entitled to a presumption of correctness.
At trial petitioner argued that the compensation he received is not income subject to Federal taxation. He also asserted that he was not involved in a trade or a business as defined by the Code. Petitioner raised no other arguments regarding the accuracy of the information returns.
Petitioner has raised only frivolous and groundless arguments. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit has held similar arguments to be frivolous and without merit.
Petitioner does not dispute that he received nonemployee compensation and wages in the amounts respondent determined. Petitioner has assigned no error to respondent's determination that he received cancellation of indebtedness income in 2004. We deem conceded any issue not raised in the assignments of error in the petition.
If the taxpayer assigns error to the Commissioner's determination that a taxpayer is liable for an addition to tax, the Commissioner has the burden, under
Respondent determined that petitioner is liable under
Petitioner did not file timely returns for the years at issue and did not introduce any credible evidence to explain his failure to do so. Consequently, we sustain respondent's determinations as to the
Respondent also determined that petitioner is liable under
Respondent did not introduce into evidence the substitutes for returns he allegedly prepared for the years at issue. Because respondent has not satisfied his burden of production, we reject his determination as to the
Respondent also determined that petitioner is liable for additions to tax for failure to pay estimated tax under
Respondent stipulated that petitioner filed returns for the years at issue. Those returns reported zero income and no income tax liabilities. Consequently, the record does not permit us to conclude that petitioner had any required annual payment for 2004, 2005, 2006, or 2008. We therefore reject respondent's determinations as to the
We have considered the parties' remaining arguments, and to the extent not discussed above, conclude those arguments are irrelevant, moot, or without merit.
To reflect the foregoing,
1. Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code (Code), as amended and in effect for the years in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. All monetary amounts have been rounded to the nearest dollar.↩
2. On his Form 4852 petitioner included the following statement: "The original W-2 incorrectly alleged that I earned 'wages'. This correcting form ends that presumption. I was a private-sector worker hired by a private sector company (non-federal entity). I was not involved in a 'trade or business'."↩
3. Petitioner included a similar statement on his self-prepared revised Form 1099-C for 2004.↩
4.
5. The term "Secretary" means "the Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate",
6. Even if we were to assume, however, that petitioner's dispute is reasonable, respondent has introduced reasonable and probative evidence that petitioner had unreported taxable income as shown on the information returns.↩
7. The
8. Unless a statutory exception applies, the