- 4 -
1998, which he received. In that notice, respondent determined a
deficiency in, an addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1) on,
and an accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(a) on, peti-
tioner’s tax for his taxable year 1998 in the respective amounts
of $8,836, $722.50, and $578.
Petitioner did not file a petition in the Court with respect
to the notice relating to his taxable year 1998. Instead, on
March 6, 2000, in response to the notice, petitioner sent a
letter (petitioner’s March 6, 2000 letter) to the Internal
Revenue Service. That letter stated in pertinent part:
According to your “Deficiency Notice” of February 18,
2000 (cover sheet attached), there is an alleged defi-
ciency with respect to my 1998 income tax of $8,836,
and if I wanted to “contest this deficiency before
making payment,” I must “file a petition with the
United States Tax Court.” Before I file, pay, or do
anything with respect to your “Notice” I must first
establish whether or not it was sent pursuant to law,
whether or not it has the “force and effect of law,”
and whether you had any authority to send me the Notice
in the first place.
* * * * * * *
Let me further point out the IRS Code Sections 6001 and
6011(as identified in the 1040 Privacy Act) notifies me
that I need only “comply with regulations.” Nothing in
the Privacy Act Notice or in the above statutes informs
me that I have [to] “comply” with, or pay attention to,
letters and/or alleged “determinations” sent to me by
various and sundry employees of the IRS.
Please note that Section 6212 states that “If the
Secretary determines that there is a deficiency in
respect of any tax...he is authorized to send notice of
such deficiency etc., etc., etc.” However, the “no-
tice” I received was not sent by the Secretary, but by
Dennis L. Paiz who is identified as being Chief, Ser-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011