James D. Horn - Page 19

                                       - 19 -                                         
          dispute his tax liabilities.  We agree.  In Aguirre v.                      
          Commissioner, 117 T.C. 324, 327 (2001), we specifically held that           
          a taxpayer who had signed a Form 4549-CG could not challenge the            
          underlying tax liability stated on the Form:                                
               By signing the Form 4549, petitioners explicitly waived                
               the right to contest in the Tax Court their tax                        
               liability for the years included in the Form 4549.                     
               * * * The fact that section 6330 now provides an                       
               opportunity to contest tax liability for taxpayers who                 
               did not receive a notice of deficiency, sec.                           
               6330(c)(2)(B), provides no consolation to petitioners                  
               who themselves made the choice not to receive such                     
               notice, see Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 611                    
               (2000) (taxpayers who deliberately refused to accept                   
               delivery of the notices of deficiency repudiated the                   
               opportunity to contest the notices of deficiency in Tax                
               Petitioner has alleged that his waivers were ineffective               
          because he was mentally incompetent when he signed the Forms                
          4549-CG.5  In his request to respondent for a section 6330                  

               5Respondent argued in a prehearing motion that petitioner is           
          estopped to challenge, on grounds of incompetence, the validity             
          of the Forms 4549-CG that he signed.  Respondent argues that he             
          relied on the Forms in proceeding to assess the taxes rather than           
          first issuing a notice of deficiency (as would have been required           
          prior to assessment under sec. 6213(a)).  If the Forms 4549-CG              
          are held to be entirely invalid and ineffective, then the time to           
          issue a notice of deficiency and assess the resulting tax may               
          have expired.  Respondent argued that because he would be                   
          prejudiced by the expiration of the period of limitations,                  
          petitioner is estopped to deny the validity of the Forms 4549-CG            
          on the grounds that he was incompetent when he signed them.  In             
          support of his argument, respondent cited Hollman v.                        
          Commissioner, 38 T.C. 251, 260 (1962) (citing Stearns Co. v.                
          United States, 291 U.S. 54, 61 (1934)); Halper v. Commissioner,             
          T.C. Memo. 1997-58; Dale v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1982-654.              
          We need not decide whether and to what extent estoppel might                
          apply.  Expiration of the period of limitations is an affirmative           

Page:  Previous  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011