Macmurray v. Comm'r
Opinion
PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b), THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.
FOLEY,
Petitioner is a licensed attorney in the State of Michigan. Prior to 2001, he worked, for 13 years, as an employee for the Internal Revenue Service. In 2001, petitioner was an employee of Duro-Last Roofing, Inc. (Duro-Last), a roofing company based in Saginaw, Michigan. On September 11, 2001, Duro-Last terminated petitioner's employment. In response, on December 5, 2001, petitioner filed a Complaint and Jury Demand (the complaint) with the Circuit Court of Saginaw County, Michigan. The complaint *123 alleged that Duro-Last had violated the State of Michigan Whistleblower's Protection Act, and that, based on Duro-Last's wrongful actions, petitioner suffered damages.
Subsequent to the filing of the complaint, the matter was referred to mediation. In 2003, as a result of mediation, Duro-Last paid petitioner $ 80,000. In addition to its payment, Duro-Last issued petitioner a Form 1099-MISC, Miscellaneous Income. Petitioner attached the Form 1099-MISC to his Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, but did not include the settlement award in gross income.
On January 3, 2006, respondent sent petitioner a notice of deficiency relating to 2003. Respondent determined that petitioner failed to report the settlement award and was liable for a
Petitioner contends that the settlement award he received was compensation for personal injuries and, pursuant to
Petitioner contends that his settlement award meets the requirements of
Respondent in his notice of deficiency determined that petitioner was liable for a
An understatement is reduced by the portion of the understatement that is attributable to the tax treatment of an item for which there is substantial authority or with respect to which there is adequate disclosure and a reasonable basis. See
Petitioner maintains that he attached the Form 1099-MISC to his return as "a good-faith effort to show that * * * [he] had received something that wasn't subject to tax." Petitioner, a lawyer who had previously worked with the Internal Revenue Service, failed, however, to make even a minimal effort to determine whether his position was correct. In short, he did not act with reasonable cause when he failed to report his settlement award as taxable income. Accordingly, he is liable for the
Contentions we have not addressed are irrelevant, moot, or meritless.
To reflect the foregoing,
Footnotes
*. This opinion replaces our previously filed opinion, T.C. Summary Opinion 2007-90, which was withdrawn by order on July 6, 2007.↩
1. Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue.↩
2. Sec 7491(a) is inapplicable because petitioner failed to introduce credible evidence within the meaning of
sec. 7491(a)(1) ↩.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.