- 11 -
delay or that the taxpayer's position in such proceeding is
frivolous or groundless.
The record in this case convinces us that petitioner was not
interested in disputing the merits of either the deficiencies in
income taxes or the additions to tax determined by respondent in
the notice of deficiency. Rather, the record demonstrates that
petitioner regards this case as a vehicle to protest the tax laws
of this country and espouse her own misguided views.
A petition to the Tax Court is frivolous "if it is contrary
to established law and unsupported by a reasoned, colorable
argument for change in the law." Coleman v. Commissioner, 791
F.2d 68, 71 (7th Cir. 1986). Petitioner's position, as set forth
in the second amended petition, consists solely of tax protester
rhetoric and legalistic gibberish. Based on well established
law, petitioner's position is frivolous and groundless.
We are also convinced that petitioner instituted and
maintained this proceeding primarily, if not exclusively, for
purposes of delay. Having to deal with this matter wasted the
Court's time, as well as respondent's. Moreover, taxpayers with
genuine controversies were delayed.
In view of the foregoing, we will exercise our discretion
under section 6673(a)(1) and require petitioner Tashina Baker and
petitioner Robert R. Baker to each pay a penalty to the United
States in the amount of $500. Coleman v. Commissioner, supra at
71-72; Crain v. Commissioner, supra at 1417-1418; Coulter v.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011