Bert LaRue and Michelle Nolen - Page 3




                                        - 2 -                                         

               Respondent determined deficiencies of $1,508, $1,163, and              
          $1,102 in petitioners' Federal income taxes, respectively, for              
          1997, 1998, and 1999 and corresponding penalties under section              
          6662(a) in the amounts of $302, $233, and $220.                             
               Some of the facts were stipulated, and those facts, with the           
          annexed exhibits, are so found and are incorporated herein by               
          reference.  At the time the petition was filed, petitioners'                
          legal residence was McIntosh, New Mexico.                                   
               For each of the years in question, petitioners claimed                 
          itemized deductions on a Schedule A, Itemized Deductions.  In the           
          notice of deficiency, respondent disallowed all the amounts                 
          claimed as deductions for each of the years at issue for                    
          charitable contributions and miscellaneous itemized deductions,             
          the latter consisting of unreimbursed employee business expenses.           
          Other itemized deductions claimed by petitioners, although                  
          substantiated, were less than the allowable standard deduction              
          under section 63(c); consequently, respondent allowed petitioners           
          the standard deduction for each of the 3 years at issue.                    
               In the stipulation, petitioners conceded the deficiencies,             
          challenging only the penalties under section 6662(a).  In                   
          addition to considering that issue, the Court also considers the            
          applicability of section 6673(a) to the facts of this case.                 
               Petitioners were both employed during 1997 and 1998;                   
          however, petitioner Michelle Nolen was not employed during 1999.            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011