- 3 -
In response to respondent's request that petitioner admit that he
received wages from the U.S. Postal Service during the years
1993, 1994, and 1995 in the amounts of $50,366, $45,454, and
$47,681, respectively, petitioner argued that Federal Reserve
notes do not represent money and also denied the requested
admission "for want of [the] meaning of '$'."2 Upon request for
admission that petitioner had failed to file income tax returns
for the years 1993, 1994, and 1995, petitioner responded by
stating that he was not required to file income tax returns.
The arguments presented by petitioner have been rejected
repeatedly over the years and are entirely without merit. It is
well settled that wages received in exchange for services
rendered constitute taxable income, Beard v. Commissioner, 82
T.C. 766, 770 (1984), affd. per curiam 793 F.2d 139 (6th Cir.
1986), and that Federal Reserve notes constitute legal tender
which must be reported on a taxpayer's Federal income tax return.
United States v. Weir, 679 F.2d 769, 770 (8th Cir. 1982). The
constitutional claim asserted by petitioner is equally without
merit and warrants no further discussion. See McCoy v.
2Petitioner also denied respondent's request that he admit
receipt of interest income, income tax refund, dividend income, a
distribution from a retirement plan, and capital gain income for
the years in issue "for want of [the] meaning of the term '$'."
Generally, a party's evasive or incomplete response to
requests for admission is treated as a failure to respond. Rules
90, 104(d); see, e.g., Cochrane v. Commissioner, 107 T.C. 18, 23-
24 (1996).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011