- 2 -
OPINION
COLVIN, Judge: This case is before the Court on
respondent's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction as to the
amounts of employment tax1 liability for the periods in issue.
We will grant respondent's motion for the reasons stated below.
Neither party requested a hearing, and we conclude that none
is necessary to decide respondent's motion.
Background
Petitioner is a sole proprietorship, the principal place of
business of which is in Birmingham, Alabama.
Respondent's agents audited petitioner's Federal Insurance
Contributions Act and income tax withholding tax returns (Forms
941) for March 31 to December 31, 1994, and March 31 to December
31, 1995, and petitioner's Federal Unemployment Tax Act tax
return (Form 940) for 1995. On March 19, 1998, respondent mailed
to petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning Worker
Classification Under Section 7436 which said in part:
As a result of an employment tax audit, we are
sending you this NOTICE OF DETERMINATION CONCERNING
WORKER CLASSIFICATION UNDER SECTION 7436. We have
determined that the individual(s) listed or described
on the attached schedule are to be legally classified
as employees for purposes of federal employment taxes
under subtitle C of the Internal Revenue Code and that
your (sic) are not entitled to relief from this
1 For convenience, we use the term "employment tax" to refer
to taxes under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA),
secs. 3101-3125, the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA), secs.
3301-3311, and income tax withholding, secs. 3401-3406 and 3509.
Unless otherwise indicated, section references are to the
Internal Revenue Code in effect for the taxable periods in issue.
Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and
Procedure.
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