- 4 -
At trial, respondent presented a representative of the
Connecticut Department of Labor as well as an individual who was
controller of Mark in 1993. The witnesses presented records of
their respective organizations that supported the amounts
determined in the notice of deficiency. Petitioner did not
present any evidence to contradict the testimony and documents
submitted by respondent supporting the determination. Petitioner
asserted that there was continuing corruption, and, therefore, he
would not comply with the requirements of filing a return and
reporting income. Petitioner has failed to establish that
respondent's determination is erroneous. Since there is no
question that the unemployment compensation and the wages
constitute taxable income, respondent's determination as to the
deficiency is sustained.
Section 6651(a)(1) provides for an addition to tax for
failure to timely file a Federal income tax return. Petitioner
was required to file a 1993 Federal income tax return on or
before April 15, 1994. Secs. 6012(a), 6072(a). Section
6651(a)(1) further provides that a taxpayer may avoid the
addition to tax if the failure to file was due to reasonable
cause and not willful neglect. United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S.
241, 245 (1985).
We conclude that petitioner's failure to file his 1993
return was due to willful neglect and not due to reasonable
cause. Petitioner's unsupported assertions of illegal acts by
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011