Joseph E. Simanonok - Page 8




                                        - 8 -                                         
               taxable income to recipient).                                          
                           *   *   *   *   *   *   *                                  
                    The record as a whole plainly demonstrates that                   
               petitioner well knew that his income was taxable.                      
               Petitioner has appeared before this Court raising                      
               frivolous and meritless arguments previously.  See                     
               Simanonok v. Commissioner, 731 F.2d 743 (11th Cir.                     
               1984), affg. an unpublished order of this Court.[7]  His               
               arguments have been rejected in many decisions by this                 
               Court in the recent past.  We conclude that petitioner                 
               is maintaining his action in this Court primarily for                  
               delay and that his position in these proceedings is                    
               frivolous and groundless.  Accordingly, on our motion,                 
               we award the United States damages in the amount of                    
               $5,000 pursuant to section 6673.  Coulter v.                           
               Commissioner, 82 T.C. 580 (1984); Abrams v.                            
               Commissioner, 82 T.C. 403 (1984).                                      
               The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed this            
          Court’s order of dismissal and decision.                                    


               7 In Simanonok v. Commissioner, 731 F.2d 743, 744 (11th Cir.           
          1984), the Court of Appeals rejected petitioner’s contention that           
          the Tax Court is unconstitutional.  The Court of Appeals also               
          rejected petitioner’s contentions (inter alia) that he is not an            
          individual subject to tax, that he is not required to file                  
          returns, and that he did not receive income because his paychecks           
          were received in exchange for his costs and disbursements of                
          labor.  See Motes v. United States, 785 F.2d 928 (11th Cir. 1986)           
          (citing Simanonok v. Commissioner, supra, for the proposition               
          that claims such as wages are not income subject to tax are                 
          frivolous); Hyslep v. United States, 765 F.2d 1083, 1084 (11th              
          Cir. 1985) (same).                                                          
               In Simanonok v. United States, 76 AFTR2d 95-6565 (1st Cir.             
          1995), the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit imposed double            
          costs on petitioner because his appeal from an order of the                 
          District Court was frivolous in part.  As relevant herein, the              
          Court of Appeals stated as follows:                                         
               Simanonok claimed that his military status exempted him                
               from federal income taxation, a claim which he knew was                
               frivolous.  Other courts have told him so, and he has                  
               been sanctioned for making it.                                         





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011