ESTATE OF NICHOLAS CHARLES STEVENS v. COMMISSIONER
Opinion
*166 PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b), THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.
PANUTHOS, Chief Special Trial Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of
Respondent determined a deficiency in decedent's Federal income tax of $ 1,324 and an addition to tax under
*167 Background
Some of the facts have been stipulated, and they are so found. The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference.
Nicholas Charles Stevens, Jr. (decedent) died in Baltimore County, Maryland, in October 2001 at the age of 18 years. Decedent's mother, Kim Patricia Bryan (Ms. Bryan), was directed to serve as personal representative of decedent's estate. At the time the petition was filed, Ms. Bryan resided in Baltimore, Maryland.
During the year in issue, decedent received wages of $ 1,048 from Maryland Car Care, Inc. and $ 4,719 from Mangione Enterprises of Turf Valley. Also during the year in issue, decedent was credited with interest income of $ 7,435 from custodial accounts at Farmers and Mechanics National Bank. Such accounts were established pursuant to the Maryland Uniform Transfers to Minors Act upon the death of decedent's father in 1992. Decedent, a minor, was 17 years old in 2000.
Decedent filed a Form 1040EZ, Income Tax Return for Single and Joint Filers with No Dependents, for the 2000 taxable year (2000 return). Decedent reported wages of $ 1,048 on his 2000 return. He did not report wages of $ 4,719 from Mangione*168 Enterprises of Turf Valley. Nor did he report the interest income of $ 7,435 from custodial accounts.
Respondent issued decedent a notice of deficiency dated December 23, 2002, determining that decedent was taxable on unreported income of $ 12,154 from wages and interest during the 2000 taxable year.2 Ms. Bryan contends that a deceased person should not be liable for any tax deficiencies.
Discussion
Decedent having filed his 2000 return after July 22, 1998, section 7491(a) is applicable in the instant case. However, neither party takes a position as to whether the burden of proof has shifted to respondent under section 7491(a). We conclude that resolution of the issue whether decedent is taxable on unreported income of $ 12,154 does not depend upon who has the burden of proof.
Gross income includes compensation for services. *169
Gross income also includes interest.
Ms. Bryan nevertheless contends that a deceased person should not be liable for any tax deficiencies. "Death may be an avenue of escape from many of the woes of life, but it is no escape*171 from taxes."
Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case Division.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered for respondent with respect to the deficiency and for petitioner with respect to the addition to tax under
Footnotes
1. Respondent concedes that decedent is not liable for the addition to tax under
sec. 6651(a)(1)↩ of $ 121.2. Respondent also determined that decedent was liable for the addition to tax under
sec. 6651(a)(1)↩ . However, as previously indicated, respondent conceded this issue at the time of trial.3. If a minor dies before attaining the requisite age, the custodial property transfers to the minor's estate upon the minor's death.
Md. Code Ann., Est. & Trusts sec. 13-320(3)↩ (LEXIS through 2003 Sess.).4. A minor who has attained the age of 14 years may seek a court order for delivery and payment of so much of the custodial property for the minor's use and benefit.
Md. Code Ann., Est. & Trusts sec. 13-314(b) (2001). In the alternative, a custodian may deliver or pay to the minor, without a court order, so much of the custodial property as the custodian considers advisable for the use and benefit of the minor. See id.sec. 13-314(a)↩ .
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.