- 4 -
determinations were incorrect. Instead, petitioners have
responded, and continue to respond, to respondent’s attempts to
verify their deductions by making numerous frivolous arguments.
Petitioners timely filed a petition with this Court in which
they made numerous frivolous arguments, such as: (1) Income is
limited to foreign earned income, war profits, and windfall
profits, (2) income tax laws are in effect only in Guam, (3)
income tax returns and payments are gifts to the United States,
(4) Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, and Form 1040A,
U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, are to be filed only by self-
employed residents of the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Guam, or
American Samoa, (5) estimated tax and interest are matters within
the exclusive jurisdiction of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Firearms, (6) no statute requires anyone to file a tax return,
(7) there is no organization in the Department of the Treasury
known as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), (8) the IRS is not
an agency of the United States, (9) the IRS is an unlawful
organization, (10) title 26 of the United States Code is not
positive law, and (11) the Tax Court lacks jurisdiction because
petitioners have not received income subject to income tax.
Petitioners did not stipulate facts as required by Rule
91(a). This Court granted respondent’s motion under Rule 91(f)
to show cause why proposed facts should not be accepted as
established and made that order absolute after petitioners failed
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011