- 30 -
reach a conclusion that the majority considers more practical
than the plain meaning application that the text demands. As
explained by the majority, some of these statements either do not
apply to a finding that the Court has jurisdiction over this case
or are statutory surplusage. Although in the latter regard the
majority is careful not to use the term “surplusage”, the
majority declines to apply part of the statements asserting that
the language therein must apply in all cases. Such reasoning is
akin to labeling the parts surplusage.
I summarize a plain reading of the separate statements and
the majority’s reading of these statements as follows:
Statutory Text A Plain Reading Majority’s Reading
In the case of
an individual
In order to In order to
acquire jurisdiction acquire jurisdiction
under section under section
6015(e), the Court 6015(e), the Court
must find that the must find that the
petitioning taxpayer petitioning taxpayer
is an individual. is an individual.
against whom a
deficiency has been In order to In order to
asserted acquire jurisdiction acquire jurisdiction
under section under section
6015(e), the Court 6015(e), the Court
must find that the never need find that
Commissioner has the Commissioner has
asserted a asserted a
deficiency against deficiency against
the petitioning the petitioning
individual. individual. This
language is not a
jurisdictional
requirement. When
an individual
Page: Previous 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011