- 14 -
Petitioner further contends that respondent had clear and
concise notice of the change of his address by virtue of the two
Forms 1099-MISC reporting petitioner's income with respect to the
1994 taxable year. Again, we disagree with petitioner.
First, neither of the Forms 1099-MISC on which petitioner
relies was available to respondent prior to August 24, 1994, the
date on which the notice of deficiency was mailed. Therefore,
neither of those documents could have alerted respondent to any
change in petitioner's address. See Abeles v. Commissioner, 91
T.C. 1019 (1988).
Even assuming arguendo that respondent was in possession of
such documents at the time the notice of deficiency was mailed, a
third-party information return does not constitute clear and
concise notice to respondent of an address change affecting the
payee. See Guillen v. Barnes, 819 F.2d 975, 977 (10th Cir.
1987); Berg v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-77; McCart v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-3, affd. without published opinion
981 F.2d 1247 (3d Cir. 1992).
In sum, petitioner failed to give respondent clear and
concise notice of his current address. We must therefore decide
whether respondent knew of a change in petitioner's address prior
to the mailing of the notice of deficiency, and, if so, whether
respondent exercised due diligence in ascertaining petitioner's
new address.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011