- 39 - due to prior examinations. Respondent also determined additions to tax for delinquency, negligence, overvaluation, and substantial understatement of tax. Although Winer testified that he did not contest any of the adjustments in the notice of deficiency because "part of my settlement was that I wouldn't do that," on June 16, 1992, Winer's attorney, Richard Baron, filed a petition on behalf of Winer. The petition was docketed as Samuel L. Winer, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent, docket No. 13308-92. In the petition, Winer set forth numerous arguments why respondent's adjustments were incorrect. Counsel for respondent in Winer's personal income tax case was Attorney Howard P. Levine (Levine) of respondent's Jacksonville District Counsel Office. Winer's personal income tax case was concluded by a stipulated settlement between Winer and the Office of Miami District Counsel. A decision in the case was entered on May 23, 1994, which reflected deficiencies in tax and additions to tax in excess of $1,200,000, not including additions to tax for negligence under section 6653(a)(2) and additional interest under section 6621(c). In December 1995, Winer filed for personal bankruptcy. At the evidentiary hearing, Winer implied that his concession and subsequent bankruptcy "[were] all part of a complicated scheme, if you will, or arrangement with the IRS," and that thePage: Previous 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011