Anthony P. Hart - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
          income taxes on his income because:  (1) The income tax is an               
          “excise tax”, and he did not engage in any “excise taxable                  
          activity”, (2) the income tax is applicable only to nonresidents,           
          and to earnings by residents from sources outside the United                
          States, and (3) “No law requires petitioner to sign a document              
          under penalty of perjury and no law requires him to file a 1040             
          tax return.”  Petitioner, of course, cites no relevant authority            
          in support of his theories.2  Petitioner also had the temerity to           
          ask for $10,000 in sanctions against respondent because he had to           
          respond to respondent’s deficiency notice.                                  
               Long before petitioner filed his trial brief, respondent had           
          provided petitioner with copies of this Court’s opinions in                 
          Rowlee v. Commissioner, 80 T.C. 1111 (1983), and Grimes v.                  
          Commissioner, 82 T.C. 235 (1984).  In both cases, this Court                
          specifically rejected (with copious citation of authorities) the            
          arguments, advanced here by petitioner, that wages are not                  
          subject to tax as income.3  Thus, petitioner was well aware when            

               2Petitioner cites a single case, Stanton v. Baltic Mining              
          Co., 240 U.S. 103 (1916), which upheld the validity of a tax on a           
          mining company under the income tax section of the Tariff Act of            
          Oct. 3, 1913, ch. 16, 38 Stat. 166, 181.  Petitioner appears to             
          cite the case for the proposition that the 16th Amendment to the            
          Constitution does not permit Congress to impose a tax on income.            
          Petitioner’s argument is, of course, utter nonsense.  The text of           
          the amendment could not be clearer in establishing the power of             
          Congress to impose and collect income taxes.                                

               3Rowlee v. Commissioner, 80 T.C. 1111 (1983), sustained the            
                                                             (continued...)           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011