Hollingshead v. Commissioner
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
SWIFT,
The issues for decision are (1) whether petitioners may take World Peace Fund tax credits based on their religious convictions; (2) whether respondent correctly determined additions to tax under section*517 6653(a); and (3) whether damages under section 6673 should be awarded the United States. This case was submitted fully stipulated pursuant to
Petitioners resided in Boyertown, Pennsylvania, at the time they filed their petitions. The cases have been consolidated for decision. Petitioners timely filed their Federal income tax returns for the years 1980 and 1981.
Petitioners are members of the Society of Friends (Quakers). As members of that religious organization petitioners adhere to the principles of nonviolence. They also object to the payment of taxes which will be used by the government to fund military activities. In light of those beliefs, petitioners claimed tax credits for "World Peace Tax Fund" and "World Peace Tax Credit" in the amounts of $4,597.88 and $3,860.42, 2 respectively, on their 1980 and 1981 Federal income tax returns.
Petitioners deposited the amounts*518 of the tax credits claimed in an escrow account. Petitioners state that they are willing to turn over the escrowed funds to the government for use "for any human [sic] service designated by the government." Petitioners contend that the
The first issue has been decided many times by this and other courts and has been rejected in each instance. See e.g.,
Petitioners suggest that two recent Supreme Court decisions,
The second issue is whether petitioners are liable for the additions to tax pursuant to section 6653(a). Respondent determined that these additions to tax were applicable for 1980 and 1981 because petitioners negligently failed to pay their total tax liabilities. Respondent's determination of negligence or intentional disregard of rules and regulations is presumptively correct and will be upheld, unless petitioners rebut the presumption by showing due care. See, among others,
The final issue for decision is whether damages should be imposed on petitioners pursuant to section 6673. Respondent seeks damages for 1980 and 1981 on the grounds that petitioners instituted their actions in these consolidated cases for purposes of delay. Under the circumstances, we think this is a proper case in which to impose damages under section 6673.
Section 6673, as it applied to petitions filed prior to January 1, 1983, provides that the Tax Court may award damages to the United States not in excess of $500 whenever it appears that a taxpayer has filed the petition merely for delay. Section 6673, as it applies to petitions filed after December 31, 1982, provides for damages not in excess of $5,000 whenever it appears that a taxpayer has filed the petition primarily for delay or where the taxpayer's position is frivolous or groundless. 3 On this record we conclude*522 that the proceedings herein were instituted for delay.
To reflect the foregoing,
Footnotes
1. Unless otherwise stated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended and in effect during 1980 and 1981.↩
2. The discrepancy between the tax credit disallowed by respondent in 1981 and the amount of the deficiency determined for that year is unexplained in the record.↩
3. The petition in docket number 6753-82 was filed on March 26, 1982, and the petition in docket number 18400-83 was filed on July 6, 1983.↩
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.