- -5
Petitioner on September 11, 1995, in his response to
respondent's motion for judgment on the pleadings apparently
recognizes that in Lonsdale v. Commissioner, 661 F.2d 71 (5th
Cir. 1981), affg. T.C. Memo. 1981-122, the Court of Appeals
affirmed our holding that a taxpayer's argument that the income
tax is a direct tax that must be apportioned among the several
States, which is similar to the argument petitioner makes in this
case, was without merit in view of the provisions of the
Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution. He states in his
response to respondent's motion that our prior holdings and those
of Courts of Appeals do not mean that this Court is not bound by
decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court, and that the holdings of the
Supreme Court of the United States in Stanton v. Baltic Mining
Co., 240 U.S. 103 (1916), and Brushaber v. Union Pac. R.R., 240
U.S. 1 (1916), support his position. Petitioner cites United
States v. Gaumer, 972 F.2d 723 (6th Cir. 1992), in support of his
position. The Gaumer case cited by petitioner was an appeal by a
defendant from a conviction for willful failure to file income
tax returns. The Court of Appeals reversed the conviction and
directed a new trial, since it found error in the ruling of the
trial judge that materials which the defendant testified he had
read and believed supported his position that he was not required
to file income tax returns were not admitted in evidence.
Relying on Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (1991), the court
stated in United States v. Gaumer, supra at 724:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011