- 4 -
characterization of the law is correct, his remedy lies with
Congress. We are not at liberty to create exceptions to the
Internal Revenue Code. See id. at 440. Thus, we conclude that
the Army loan repayment constitutes gross income within the
meaning of section 61.
Petitioner also argues that the imposition of interest is
inappropriate since he did not receive a Form W-2 reflecting the
Army loan repayment and, therefore, had no way of knowing that
the Army loan repayment constituted gross income. Generally this
Court has no jurisdiction in a deficiency proceeding over
interest questions. White v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. 209, 213
(1990). Section 7481(c) provides that this Court may redetermine
interest, but only after the decision in a case has become final,
the interest has been assessed, and the taxpayer has paid the
interest in dispute. See Pen Coal Corp. v Commissioner, 107 T.C.
249, 263 (1996). These conditions are not present in this case.
Furthermore, while section 6404(g), added by section 302 of the
Taxpayer Bill of Rights 2, Pub. L. 104-168, 110 Stat. 1452, 1457
(1996), authorizes this Court to review the Secretary's failure
to abate interest with respect to requests for abatement made
after July 30, 1996, under section 6404(e), petitioner has not
shown that he has made such a request. See Rule 280(b); Coffield
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-365.
To reflect the foregoing,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011