- 11 -
original filing position. She stated that the Form W-2 income
did not belong on line 7 and that the expenses were properly
reported on Schedule C. On its face this position is confusing
and inconsistent. Petitioner also stated in the second letter
that she would be forwarding to respondent a confirmation of her
duties from her employer. Although petitioner obtained the third
letter that purported to confirm her employment and to support
her filing position, there is no evidence that respondent
received this letter prior to the issuance of the notice of
deficiency.1
Moreover, even if respondent had received the third letter
before issuing the notice of deficiency, the third letter does
not provide persuasive support for petitioner’s contention. The
third letter is written by a representative from Arch Wireless,
but petitioner’s tax return includes a Form W-2 from USA Mobile
as her employer. The third letter merely states that petitioner
was an outside account executive employed by Arch Wireless for
part of 1998 and that her responsibilities included “outside
business to business sales and service for new and existing
1 Respondent states in the objection to motion, filed Mar.
19, 2002, that the letters dated Jan. 11, 2001, and June 26,
2001, from officials of petitioner’s employer were first
presented to a representative of respondent on Oct. 16, 2001.
Appeals Officer Elaine Rhoton did not recall receiving any
documents from petitioner prior to her meeting with Mr. De
Montbreun on Oct. 16, 2001. The two letters were stapled
together in the administrative file, and the Appeals Officer
believes that they both were received at the same time.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011