- 4 -
OPINION
On brief petitioner argues that: (1) Respondent has no
jurisdiction over him in this matter, and therefore, the notice
of deficiency is void; (2) this Court lacks subject matter
jurisdiction; and (3) petitioner is not a “person” or
“individual” as those terms are defined and applied in title 26.
Petitioner’s arguments are reminiscent of tax-protester
rhetoric that has been universally rejected by this and other
courts. We shall not painstakingly address petitioner's
assertions "with somber reasoning and copious citation of
precedent; to do so might suggest that these arguments have some
colorable merit." Williams v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. ,
(2000) (slip op. at 5) (quoting Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d
1417, 1417 (5th Cir. 1984)). Accordingly, we hold that
petitioner is liable for the deficiency determined by respondent.
Respondent determined that petitioner is liable for an
addition to tax pursuant to section 6651(a)(1). Section
6651(a)(1) provides an addition to tax for failure to timely file
a return. The addition to tax is equal to 5 percent of the
amount required to be shown as tax on the return, with an
additional 5 percent for each additional month or fraction
thereof during which such failure continues, not exceeding 25
percent in the aggregate. A taxpayer may avoid the addition to
tax by establishing that the failure to file a timely return was
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011