- 2 -
Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner’s 1998
Federal income tax and an addition to tax under section
6651(a)(1) of $3,433 and $321, respectively. After concessions
by the parties,2 the issues are (1) whether petitioner is liable
for the additional tax under section 72(t) and (2) whether
petitioner is liable for the addition to tax under section
6651(a)(1). Petitioner resided in New Orleans, Louisiana, when
the petition in this case was filed.
The facts may be summarized as follows. During 1998,
petitioner received a distribution of $4,388.25 from a section
401(k) retirement plan and $2,470.32 from an employee stock
option plan (ESOP). Regions Bank Delchamps, Inc. was the trustee
for both plans. Petitioner included both distributions in gross
income on his 1998 Federal income tax return, but he did not pay
any additional tax under section 72(t). During 1998, petitioner
had not attained the age of 59-1/2. Petitioner did not claim any
deduction for a dependency exemption on his 1998 return.
Respondent received petitioner’s 1998 Federal income tax
return on July 19, 1999. The return was mailed during that
month, the exact date, however, is unclear. Petitioner had not
2 In the notice of deficiency, respondent determined that
petitioner had additional income from cancellation of a debt
($7,283) and self-employment income ($6,093). Respondent has
conceded both issues. Respondent also disallowed itemized
deductions of $259. Neither in his petition nor at trial has
petitioner raised this issue, and it is deemed conceded. See
Levin v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 698, 722-723 (1986), affd. 832
F.2d 403 (7th Cir. 1987).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011