-4- one personal exemption. In calculating the respective deficien- cies determined in the notices, respondent applied the tax rates applicable to married individuals filing separately. Respondent also determined that, for 1983 through 1987, Mr. Martinez is liable for self-employment tax. Discussion Petitioners bear the burden of proving that respondent's determinations in the notices are erroneous. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Petitioners contend that they are not liable for tax for the years at issue because, inter alia: 3. The exercise of petitioners' religion prevents them from supporting or cooperating with any per- son or organization engaged in allowing, recom- mending, encouraging, promoting. performing, or paying for abortion, or protecting or paying for the protection of people who allow, recommend, encourage, promote, perform, or pay for abortions. 4. The computation and payment of money to a person or organization engaged in allowing, recommending, encouraging, promoting. performing, or paying for abortion, or protecting or paying for the protec- tion of people who allow, recommend, encourage, promote, perform, or pay for abortions if [sic] a violation of petitioner's religion. 5. The Constitution of the United States guarantees petitioners' right to the free exercise of reli- gion. Article I of the Amendments to the Consti- tution. 6. An amendment [the 16th Amendment] to the United States Constitution that was not properly approved in accordance with provisions for amending the Constitution and is therefore improperly enforced is not superior to the guarantees provided in the First Amendment to the Constitution, in particu-Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011