2002 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 30">*30 An order will be entered granting respondent's motions for summary judgment and for penalty.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
COLVIN, Judge: Respondent determined that petitioner has an income tax deficiency of $ 92,384 for 1998 and is liable for an addition to tax under
Background
Petitioner was retired and lived in Mississippi when he filed the petition.
In 1998, petitioner received $ 217,331.44 in retirement distributions and $ 920.09 in nonemployee compensation. In 1998, Primerica Life Insurance Co. issued to petitioner three Forms 1099- MISC, Miscellaneous Income, which state that he received $ 920.09 of taxable nonemployee compensation. Petitioner also received five Forms 1099-R, Distribution From Pensions, Annuities, Retirement or Profit- Sharing Plans, IRAs, Insurance2002 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 30">*31 Contracts, etc., which state that he received in 1998 retirement account distributions totaling $ 217,331.44, of which $ 214,756.96 is taxable.
Petitioner submitted a Form 1040, Individual Income Tax Return, for 1998 on which he reported zero income, $ 5,629 in income tax withholding, and an overpayment for which he sought a $ 5,629 refund. He attached to his Form 1040 a signed statement consisting of two typewritten pages in which he made various arguments denying his duty to file a return and defending his return.
Respondent determined that petitioner received taxable income of $ 920 in nonemployee compensation and $ 214,756 in retirement distributions in 1998, and that petitioner was liable for income tax of $ 70,778 for that year. Respondent also determined that petitioner was liable for self-employment tax of $ 130 for nonemployee compensation, the 10-percent additional tax of $ 21,476 under
In his petition, petitioner disputes that he has a deficiency or is liable for any addition to tax for 1998. The following is the only fact petitioner alleged in the petition:
That the amount of the alleged taxable income, penalties and interest thereon are erroneous. Petitioner asserts that the IRS [sic] distribution is not a taxable event.
Our standing pretrial order served on petitioner on October 27, 2000, requires the parties to exchange documents to be used at trial at least 15 days before trial. Materials not provided in compliance with our standing pretrial order may be excluded from evidence.
In his trial memorandum, petitioner alleged: (1) Income from sources not listed in section 861 is exempt from taxation; (2) income earned by U.S. citizens in the United States is not listed, and thus is exempt; and (3) petitioner is a U.S. citizen and has income only from domestic sources. On April 2, 2001, we ordered petitioner to give to respondent within 30 days all evidence on which2002 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 30">*33 he relies to show that respondent's determination is incorrect, including a copy of documents which petitioner contends supports his position, and a detailed statement from petitioner that explains each of petitioner's claims. Despite our issuance of that order, petitioner has not given respondent any evidence relating to respondent's determination. He provided only a document in which he repeated the arguments described above that he made in his pretrial memorandum.
Discussion
Respondent filed a motion under
Petitioner contends that summary judgment is not proper, that respondent is incorrect as a matter of law, and that trial on the merits is required. Petitioner contends that respondent does not dispute many tax returns that are similar to petitioner's return. Petitioner points out that
Petitioner's contention that his income is not taxable is incorrect as a matter of law. Petitioner's Form 1040 for 1998 and the Forms 1099-MISC and Forms 1099-R attached to the Form 1040 show that petitioner is liable for additional tax under
B. Respondent's Motion for Imposition of a Penalty Under
The Court may require the taxpayer to pay a penalty2002 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 30">*35 to the United States of not more than $ 25,000 if the taxpayer instituted or maintained proceedings primarily for delay, if the taxpayer's position is frivolous or groundless, or if the taxpayer unreasonably failed to pursue administrative remedies.
Petitioner took frivolous positions in a prior case. See
Rayner's appeal surpasses mere frivolity and registers an extraordinary score on the appellate scale of vexation. Mr. Rayner is given notice that future frivolous appeals will be subject to the full panoply of sanctions authorized by
We conclude that petitioner2002 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 30">*37 is liable for a penalty of $ 5,000 under
Accordingly,
An order will be entered granting respondent's motions for summary judgment and for a penalty, and decision will be entered for respondent in amounts consistent with the foregoing.
1. The Forms 1099-R attached to petitioner's Form 1040 for 1998 show early IRA distributions of $ 184,802.32 (not $ 214,756.96, as determined by respondent) for which no exceptions to the 10-percent penalty imposed by
2. This amount is less than the amount respondent determined because the