Bassam J. Abdallah - Page 5




                                        - 4 -                                         
          2A(a)(1), Income Tax Regs., provides:  “Such a request shall be             
          made by filing an application for exemption on Form 4361”.                  
               The parties agree that petitioner is a minister who                    
          qualifies for exemption under section 1402(e).  The parties                 
          further agree that, if Form 4361 was filed, the filing was                  
          timely.  The issue is whether petitioner filed a Form 4361 in               
          1977.                                                                       
               We found petitioner’s evidence that he had filed for an                
          exemption to be particularly credible.  His testimony concerning            
          the filing of the Form 4361 was straightforward and plausible.              
          Further, his testimony was buttressed by the written statement of           
          a witness who observed petitioner complete and sign the Form 4361           
          in 1977.2                                                                   
               With regards to whether the application was approved by                
          respondent, as required by the regulations, see section                     
          1.1402(e)-2A(c), Income Tax Regs., we believe that such approval            
          must have been given.3  Petitioner consistently has not paid                
          self-employment taxes on his ministerial earnings since 1977.               
          While we reject any argument concerning estoppel against                    
          respondent, it seems highly peculiar that, if the approval had              


               2  Technically, the statement is hearsay.  See Fed. R. Evid.           
          802.  However, respondent has not raised an objection, and the              
          statement definitely has probative value.  See Rule 177.                    
               3  While petitioner could not produce a copy of the                    
          application, we note that neither sec. 1402(e), sec. 6001                   
          (pertaining to required records), nor the applicable regulations            
          require petitioner to retain such a copy.                                   





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011