- 5 - on petitioners' Form 1040, and this excess constitutes the AMT determined in the notice of deficiency. At trial, Rolly J. Sorrentino (petitioner) contended that line 24 of the form is ambiguous as well as the instructions for calculation of the amounts for that line. The Court disagrees with petitioner. Section 55(b)(1)(A)(i)(I) and (II) provides, in pertinent part, that the amount of the AMT in the case of noncorporate taxpayers is the sum of: (I) 26 percent of so much of the taxable excess as does not exceed $175,000, plus (II) 28 percent of so much of the taxable excess as exceeds $175,000. Since petitioners' taxable excess was $24,811, which is considerably less than $175,000, the directions for line 24 of the form in clear terms stated that petitioners' entry on line 24 should have been 26 percent of $24,811, and the $3,500 to be subtracted from the resulting calculation only applied if petitioners' taxable excess had been $175,000 or more. The Court finds no ambiguity as to this entry or the basis upon which the computation was to be made as directed on line 24 of the form. Petitioners, therefore, erred in making their computation for the entry on line 24.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011