- 3 - petitioner apparently is arguing that because her employer failed to withhold she should not be held liable for Federal income tax on income received from that employer. The fact that petitioner’s employer did not withhold taxes from her income is irrelevant to petitioner’s tax liability. Income derived from compensation for services is clearly gross income subject to taxation. See sec. 61(a). Furthermore, the burden of paying tax on this income ultimately falls on each individual liable for the tax, not on her employer. See Edwards v. Commissioner, 39 T.C. 78, 83-84 (1962), affd. on this issue, revd. on another issue, and remanded, 323 F.2d 751 (9th Cir. 1963); Harper v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990-239. Petitioner is now liable for the same amount of tax as she would have been had her employer withheld any amounts; the date of the payment of such tax merely was delayed. Petitioner also disputes the interest which respondent asserts is due on the deficiency. This Court does not have jurisdiction to redetermine interest in this case prior to the entry of a decision redetermining the deficiency. See sec. 7481(c); Rule 261; Pen Coal Corp. v. Commissioner, 107 T.C. 249, 255 (1996). To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered for respondent.Page: Previous 1 2 3
Last modified: May 25, 2011