James E. Anderson and Cheryl J. Latos - Page 17

                                       - 17 -                                         
          is petitioners’ obligation in the first instance.  An employer,             
          on the other hand, is an intermediary or collection agent who may           
          be obligated to withhold amounts from an employee for the                   
          employee’s future use as a credit or payment of any income tax              
          liability.  Whether Mr. Anderson was self-employed or instead was           
          an employee of the boat owners, the fact remains that nothing was           
          withheld from what they paid him.  Thus his gross receipts from             
          that source are subject to income tax in their entirety, with no            
          credit for withholding.  See Goins v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.              
          1997-521, affd. without published opinion 151 F.3d 1029 (4th Cir.           
          1998).                                                                      
               We have reviewed petitioners’ arguments as to why they are             
          not taxable on the income or the receipts from fishing activity.            
          Petitioners’ arguments are without substance and constitute                 
          nothing more than mere protester type arguments, which are not              
          worthy of further analysis or review.                                       
               Accordingly, we hold that petitioners are liable for the               
          income tax, as reported by them, for 1996 and 1997.                         
          IV.  Whether There Was An Abuse of Discretion                               
               With respect to the 1995, 1996, and 1997 tax years, the                
          Appeals officer verified that respondent had complied with the              
          legal and procedural requirements prerequisite to the proposed              
          levy action.  The Appeals officer verified that petitioners had             
          been issued a notice and demand to pay the liabilities along with           






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011