- 17 - is petitioners’ obligation in the first instance. An employer, on the other hand, is an intermediary or collection agent who may be obligated to withhold amounts from an employee for the employee’s future use as a credit or payment of any income tax liability. Whether Mr. Anderson was self-employed or instead was an employee of the boat owners, the fact remains that nothing was withheld from what they paid him. Thus his gross receipts from that source are subject to income tax in their entirety, with no credit for withholding. See Goins v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-521, affd. without published opinion 151 F.3d 1029 (4th Cir. 1998). We have reviewed petitioners’ arguments as to why they are not taxable on the income or the receipts from fishing activity. Petitioners’ arguments are without substance and constitute nothing more than mere protester type arguments, which are not worthy of further analysis or review. Accordingly, we hold that petitioners are liable for the income tax, as reported by them, for 1996 and 1997. IV. Whether There Was An Abuse of Discretion With respect to the 1995, 1996, and 1997 tax years, the Appeals officer verified that respondent had complied with the legal and procedural requirements prerequisite to the proposed levy action. The Appeals officer verified that petitioners had been issued a notice and demand to pay the liabilities along withPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011