James E. Stafford - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         

          response to respondent's summary judgment motion.  In these                 
          circumstances, we conclude that petitioner has failed to set                
          forth any specific fact showing there is a genuine issue for                
          trial in regard to the income tax deficiencies and additions to             
          tax under section 6654.                                                     
               The suggestion in the petition that petitioner was                     
          "prevented" from providing financial information to refute                  
          respondent's deficiency determination on Fifth Amendment grounds            
          does not alter our conclusion.  The petition states:                        
               Petitioner * * * has at various times offered to file 1040s            
               upon receipt of a proper grant of immunity.  Without a grant           
               of immunity, Petitioner is prevented from submitting                   
               financial information sufficient to refute the taxable                 
               income determined by Respondent lest it be used against him            
               in a civil or criminal matter.  Petitioner does not need               
               immunity because he believes he has committed a criminal act           
               -- quite the contrary.  Petitioner's fear of providing the             
               information without immunity is real and substantial.                  
               Petitioner recently was released after serving time in a               
               Federal prison for alleged income tax offences [sic].  At              
               his trial, a 1040, he had filed about 1980, was used by the            
               Government as an exhibit to the jury and was instrumental in           
               a jury conviction. * * *                                               
          In all of petitioner's subsequent filings in this case, most of             
          which were in response to efforts to obtain disclosure of                   
          information from petitioner, there was no mention of immunity or            
          the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-                      
          incrimination.  Instead, petitioner took the position that                  
          respondent lacked authority to proceed against him because of a             
          transfer of functions to the BATF or a lack of implementing                 
          regulations.  Likewise, at the hearing and recall of this case,             
          as well as in his response to respondent's motion for summary               

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011