HOWARD v. COMMISSIONER
Opinion
*89 Respondent's motion granted and petitioner required to pay a penalty under
MEMORANDUM OPINION
GOLDBERG, Special Trial Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner's Federal income tax for the taxable year 1996 in the amount of $ 4,391, and additions to tax under
After a concession by petitioner, 1 the remaining issues in this case are: (1) Whether $ 33,339.05 received by petitioner for his labor in 1996 is taxable wage income; (2) whether petitioner is liable for the additions to tax for failure to timely file his 1996 Federal income tax return and for failure to pay estimated tax; and (3) whether a penalty should be awarded to the United States under
*90 Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found. The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. At the time the petition was filed, petitioner resided in Tucson, Arizona.
We begin by noting that petitioner has been before this Court on three prior occasions arguing the same issue, namely, amounts reported on petitioner's Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, from his employment with the Family Life Broadcasting System (FLBS) is not subject to income tax. See
During 1996, petitioner was an engineer for a radio station, FLBS, in Tucson, Arizona. He has been a full-time employee with FLBS since 1994. *91 Prior to 1994 petitioner was an independent contractor of FLBS. During the year in issue petitioner received health insurance, paid vacation and sick leave, and other benefits from FLBS. FLBS provides these benefits only to its employees and not to its independent contractors. On December 29, 1993, as a requirement of his employment, petitioner signed a Form W-4, Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate. On the Form W-4, petitioner claimed nine exemptions. 2 Petitioner has not signed any other Form W-4 since December 29, 1993.
*92 FLBS prepared a 1996 Form W-2 for petitioner showing wage income of $ 33,339.05 and Federal income tax withheld of $ 1,167.15. Petitioner did not make any payments to the Internal Revenue Service for the 1996 taxable year other than the withholdings. Petitioner did not file a Federal income tax return for the 1996 taxable year.
In a notice of deficiency, respondent determined that petitioner received taxable wage income of $ 33,339.05. Respondent also determined that petitioner was liable for additions to tax for failure to file a Federal income tax return for the 1996 taxable year and failure to pay the estimated tax liability.
At the close of trial, respondent orally moved to impose sanctions under
This Court and Federal courts across the nation have repeatedly rejected petitioner's arguments that amounts he received from FLBS do not constitute wage income and that reporting and paying income taxes are strictly voluntary.
Respondent determined an addition to tax as a result of petitioner's failure to timely file his tax returns for the tax year 1996.
The addition is applicable unless petitioner establishes that his failure to timely file the return was due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect. Id. If petitioner exercised ordinary business care and prudence and was nonetheless unable to file his return within the date prescribed by law, then reasonable cause exists.
Petitioner's 1996 Federal income tax return was due on April 15, 1997. Petitioner did not file his 1996 Federal income tax return and offered no explanation for his failure to file his return. Petitioner failed to show that he exercised ordinary care and prudence in this case. Accordingly, petitioner*95 is liable for the addition to tax under
Respondent also determined that petitioner is liable for an addition to tax pursuant to
We now turn to respondent's motion for damages under
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered for respondent and an appropriate order will be entered for the award of the penalty*97 under
Footnotes
1. Petitioner conceded that he received interest income of $ 31 from Arizona Central Credit Union in 1996, and that such interest income is taxable. Of the $ 31 interest paid, $ 9 was withheld by Arizona Central Credit Union for Federal income taxes.↩
2. At trial, the following exchange took place between respondent and petitioner:
Q: * * * How many . . . allowances did you claim in -- on that
W-4 form?
A: Nine.
Q: Are you married, Mr. Howard?
A: No.
Q: Do you have nine -- or eight children living with you?
A: No. That's not how that works.
* * * * * *
Q: The W-4 they had you sign was in order to withhold taxes from
you; isn't that true?
A: Presumably.
Q: And did they --
A: Because they believed I needed to.
Q: Did they withhold taxes from you in 1996?
A: Uh-huh.↩
3. Because petitioner failed to introduce any credible evidence, he failed to meet the requirements of
sec. 7491(a) , as amended, so as to place the burden of proof on respondent with respect to any factual issue relevant to ascertaining liability for the tax deficiency in issue. As to the additions to tax undersecs. 6651 and6654 , we find that respondent has satisfied his burden of production undersec. 7491(c) because the record shows that petitioner's return was never filed and petitioner underpaid the estimated tax due.Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438, 442↩ (2001) .
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.