Robert L. Allum - Page 2

                                         -2-                                          
          received may be excluded from his gross income under section                
          104(a)(2);2 and (2) if the total settlement proceeds are not                
          excluded under section 104(a)(2), whether a portion of the                  
          settlement proceeds that petitioner paid to his attorney as a               
          contingent fee3 may be excluded from petitioner’s gross income.4            


               1(...continued)                                                        
          violates Amends. V, VI, and VII of the U.S. Constitution.                   
          Petitioner’s arguments are specious and frivolous, resembling in            
          tone the type of tax-protester arguments with which we are                  
          sometimes presented.  We shall not address petitioner’s                     
          “constitutional” arguments “with somber reasoning and copious               
          citation of precedent; to do so might suggest these arguments               
          have some colorable merit.”  Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d                
          1417, 1417 (5th Cir. 1984).  We simply point out that this Court            
          is a court of law, Freytag v. Commissioner, 501 U.S. 868, 890-891           
          (1991), with jurisdiction to decide income tax issues of the type           
          raised in this case, secs. 6211-6214, I.R.C. 1986.                          
               2Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to             
          the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue, and              
          all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and              
          Procedure.                                                                  
               3In this case, the attorney’s fee was a fixed fee that was             
          contingent upon the successful settlement of petitioner’s claims.           
          Although the amount of the fee was not dependent on the amount of           
          the settlement, the fee nevertheless was a contingent fee in that           
          it was payable only if a settlement was successfully negotiated             
          and consummated.  See Black’s Law Dictionary 338 (8th ed. 2004)             
          (a contingent fee is “A fee charged for a lawyer’s services only            
          if the lawsuit is successful or is favorably settled out of                 
          court”).                                                                    
               4Respondent concedes that the $75,000 fee paid to                      
          petitioner’s attorney is deductible, but only “as a miscellaneous           
          itemized deduction, subject to the restrictions of sections 67              
          and 68 and, if appropriate, the application of the Alternative              
          Minimum Tax provisions, sections 55 and 56.”  In his reply brief,           
          petitioner argues for the first time that the attorney’s fee is             
          deductible or excludable as a Schedule C, Profit or Loss From               
          Business, expense but did not offer any evidence at trial that              
                                                             (continued...)           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011