- 18 -
scheme of taxation, whether the tax is imposed on property, income,
or purchases of goods and services, has yet been devised which is
free of all discriminatory impact.'" Druker v. Commissioner, 77
T.C. 867, 872 (1981) (quoting San Antonio Indep. Sch. Dist. v.
Rodriguez, 411 U.S. at 42), affd. in part on this issue and revd.
in part on another issue 697 F.2d 46 (2d Cir. 1982).
In sum, we hold that no denial of the equal protection or due
process provisions of the Constitution has occurred herein.
c. Equitable Arguments
Petitioners maintain that to tax the gain from the sale of
their Mequon residence because they could not afford to purchase
another house of equal or greater value constitutes "blatant
discrimination on the basis of wealth." Petitioners' economic
hardship situation does not alleviate their obligation to report
the gain on the sale of their Mequon residence, as required by
section 1034. To petitioners this result may appear inequitable.
Petitioners essentially are requesting the Court to ignore the
plain language of the statute and rewrite the statute to achieve
what they regard as an equitable result. See Hildebrand v.
Commissioner, 683 F.2d 57, 58-59 (3d Cir. 1982), affg. T.C. Memo.
1980-532. This we cannot do. We cannot alter the plain reading
of the statute. Petitioner has not cited any authority for us to
9(...continued)
portion includable in gross income. Sec. 72(t).
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011