Taylor v. Commissioner
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PARR,
*81 Petitioner asserts that the doctrine of collateral estoppel does not apply for 1987, because he pleaded guilty under duress, and that the 3-year limitation period under section 6501(a) bars the assessment and collection of the deficiency and additions to tax for 1987.
The respondent's motion for partial summary judgment is based on the pleadings filed in this case.
We must decide whether petitioner is collaterally estopped from contesting that the deficiency in his income tax for 1987 was due to fraud within the meaning of
Respondent determined a deficiency in, and additions to, petitioner's Federal income tax for the taxable year 1987 as follows:
| Additions to Tax | ||||
| Year | Deficiency | Sec. 6653(b)(1)(A) | Sec. 6653(b)(1)(B) | Sec. 6661 |
| 1987 | $ 67,508 | $ 50,631 | 50 percent of the | $ 16,877 |
| interest due on | ||||
| $ 67,508 | ||||
Petitioner resided in Tigard, Oregon, at the time he petitioned this Court to redetermine respondent's determination of a deficiency in his income tax and additions to tax as set out above. For 1987, respondent determined that*82 petitioner had $ 199,796 of unreported income. 2
The petitioner herein was the defendant in the criminal case of
Petitioner was indicted on April 14, 1993, with respect to the criminal matter. The indictment charged that petitioner knowingly and willfully attempted to evade Federal income tax for 1987 by filing a false and fraudulent joint Federal income tax return in violation of
In connection with the criminal case, petitioner, who was represented*83 by counsel, pleaded guilty on December 6, 1993, to tax evasion for 1987 in violation of
Prior to sentencing, petitioner moved to withdraw his guilty plea and requested that the court grant him a jury trial on the ground that his guilty plea was coerced and involuntary, thus violating both his
Petitioner ultimately served 3 years' probation, with 4 months of home detention while attending graduate school in Phoenix, Arizona.
Summary judgment is intended to expedite litigation and avoid unnecessary and expensive trials.
The instant case is ripe for partial summary judgment. It is well established that petitioner's conviction of criminal tax evasion, under
In the case at bar, it is uncontroverted that the petitioner, a college graduate with several years of experience in business, who was represented by counsel, pleaded guilty to a charge of tax evasion, under
Petitioner raised the issue of coercion on appeal and failed to persuade the Court of Appeals, which affirmed his conviction, and the Supreme Court denied review. The judgment in his criminal case is final. We caution petitioner's counsel that his objection to respondent's motion borders on the behavior proscribed by section 6673(a)(2)(A) (in regard to multiplying the proceedings unreasonably) and Rule 33(b) (in regard to signing a pleading not well grounded in fact nor warranted*87 by existing law, and interposed for an improper purpose), and may invite sanctions.
We thus hold that petitioner is estopped from denying, for purposes of this case, that he filed a false and fraudulent Federal income tax return, with the intent to evade income tax for 1987.
Finally, because petitioner's fraudulent intent, for purposes of the additions to tax under
Respondent's motion for partial summary judgment will be granted.
To reflect the foregoing,
Footnotes
1. All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the taxable year in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, unless otherwise indicated. All dollar amounts are rounded to the nearest dollar.↩
2. Respondent's motion is for partial summary judgment with respect to the issue of civil fraud pursuant to
sec. 6653(b)↩ . The amount of the underlying deficiency for 1987 remains to be adjudicated.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.