- 3 - ment account, and/or capital gain. According to the notices, respondent relied on, inter alia, certain information returns, petitioner's 1992 return, and/or the Consumer Price Index roll- over method (CPI rollover method) to reconstruct petitioner's income for each of the years at issue. Respondent also deter- mined in the notice, inter alia, that petitioner is not entitled to certain deductions that petitioner claimed in Schedule C, Profit or Loss From Business, and Schedule E, Supplemental Income and Loss (Schedule E), of his 1992 return. After petitioner filed the petition in this case, he did not cooperate with respondent in preparing this case for trial or in settling it, although he did submit a trial memorandum which the Court had filed on October 27, 1997. In his trial memorandum, petitioner advanced protester type contentions that have been rejected by the courts as frivolous and/or groundless.2 2 By way of illustration, petitioner states, inter alia, in his trial memorandum the following: I have relied on the professional opinion of attorneys, who have not been rebutted by the IRS, that (a) there is no statute that compels anyone and everyone to filing and assessing themselves a 1040 Tax [sic] and (b) Title 26, the Income Tax Code cannot be enforced outside of the federal government's jurisdiction, absent voluntary self assessment by those outside such jurisdiction. Enacted Federal law is limited by the Constitution to "10 Square Miles", Article I Section 8. The fact that federal law cannot automatically and presumptively extend into the States has been recon- firmed by the Supreme Court * * *. The only way that federal legislation becomes effective outside the territo- ries and possessions of the U.S. is by voluntary participa- (continued...)Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011