- 11 - return for 2000 and is liable for the addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1) of $6,322 for 2000. 3. Whether Petitioner Is Liable for the Addition to Tax Under Section 6654 for Failure To Pay Estimated Tax Respondent has met the burden of production under section 7491(c) with respect to the addition to tax for failure to pay estimated tax under section 6654(a) because the record shows that petitioner did not pay estimated tax with respect to his tax liability for 2000. Petitioner contends that he is not liable for the addition to tax under section 6654 for 2000 because no tax was due. We disagree because (a) tax was due from petitioner for 2000 as discussed above at paragraph A of the opinion, and (b) section 6654(a) applies for reasons described next. Section 6654(a) imposes an addition to tax for failure to pay estimated income taxes unless one of the exceptions in section 6654(e) applies. Niedringhaus v. Commissioner, 99 T.C. 202, 222 (1992); Grosshandler v. Commissioner, 75 T.C. 1, 20-21 (1980). Petitioner does not allege, and we do not find, that he paid estimated tax or that any of the exceptions apply. Thus, we sustain respondent’s determination that petitioner is liable for the addition to tax under section 6654(a). E. Petitioner’s Motions To Reopen the Record Petitioner requests that we reopen the record to admit into evidence affidavits from Dunstan and his therapist. He contendsPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011