Stanley C. Wolcott - Page 6




                                        - 6 -                                         
          shown on the individual’s return for the year or, if no return is           
          filed, 90 percent of his or her tax for such year, or (2) if the            
          individual filed a return for the immediately preceding taxable             
          year, 100 percent of the tax shown on that return.  Sec.                    
          6654(d)(1)(A) and (B)(i) and (ii).                                          
               Respondent has satisfied his burden of production with                 
          respect to all three additions to tax.  With respect to the                 
          section 6651(a)(1) addition to tax, respondent has satisfied his            
          burden of production because, as the parties have stipulated,               
          petitioner failed to file tax returns for the 2000 and 2001                 
          taxable years until February 23, 2007.                                      
               Respondent has satisfied his burden of production with                 
          respect to the section 6651(a)(2) addition to tax because                   
          petitioner failed to pay his entire 2000 and 2001 tax liabilities           
          as shown on the late returns that petitioner filed on February              
          23, 2007.6                                                                  
               Finally, respondent has satisfied his burden of production             
          with respect to the section 6654(a) addition to tax because                 
          petitioner failed to file 2000 and 2001 Federal income tax                  
          returns until February 23, 2007, and made no estimated tax                  


               6 Mendes v. Commissioner, 121 T.C. 308, 324-325 (2003),                
          which suggests that petitioner’s late return is not considered a            
          “return” for purposes of the addition to tax, is distinguishable            
          because respondent filed amended answers to the amended petitions           
          and because petitioner then stipulated the recalculated and                 
          increased tax deficiencies.                                                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007