David M. Leggett - Page 17




                                       - 17 -                                         
          tax law did not require him to file such returns and pay such               
          taxes.  According to petitioner, despite repeated inquiries, the            
          Service never informed him of his responsibility to file returns,           
          and his independent research and consultation with various                  
          attorneys, predominately criminal defense attorneys, about the              
          requirement to file returns showed that there were "confusing and           
          conflicting case authorities" on that question.                             
               A good-faith misunderstanding of the tax laws could negate             
          fraud under section 6653(b).  See Niedringhaus v. Commissioner,             
          supra at 217.  However, "There is a difference * * * between a              
          good-faith misunderstanding of the law and a good-faith belief              
          that the law is invalid or a good-faith disagreement with the               
          law".  Id.  Based on our observation of petitioner's demeanor at            
          trial, we did not find him credible and do not accept his ex-               
          planations as to why he did not file returns and pay taxes due              
          for the years at issue and why he and Ms. Leggett transferred               
          certain of their real properties to nominees.  We are convinced             
          on the record before us that petitioner did not have a good-faith           
          misunderstanding of the tax law.5  By way of illustration, after            
          respondent commenced collection efforts in early 1994 against               

               5  At best, petitioner had a good-faith belief that the tax            
          law is invalid, or he had a good-faith disagreement with the tax            
          law.  Even if petitioner had believed that he did not have to               
          file returns because the tax law requiring such filing is un-               
          constitutional, a belief that the tax law is unconstitutional and           
          should not apply is not a sufficient defense to fraud.  See Cheek           
          v. United States, 498 U.S. 192, 205-206 (1991); Niedringhaus v.             
          Commissioner, 99 T.C. 202, 219 (1992).                                      




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011