- 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