Gary Don Erwin - Page 9

                                          8                                           
          generally, it is mandatory, and extenuating circumstances are               
          irrelevant.  Estate of Ruben v. Commissioner, 33 T.C. 1071, 1072            
          (1960); see also Grosshandler v. Commissioner, 75 T.C. 1, 20-21             
          (1980) (imposition of section 6654 addition to tax is mandatory             
          where estimated payments do not equal statutorily required                  
          percentage).                                                                
               However, as with section 6651(a)(1), the Commissioner bears            
          the burden of production regarding the section 6654 addition to             
          tax.  For the reasons stated herewith, we hold that respondent              
          has met this burden.                                                        
               Petitioner conceded that he did not pay any estimated tax on           
          the wages he received from Compliance in 2001.  Petitioner did              
          not offer any explanation for his failure to pay beyond his                 
          reasoning that he had to wait for respondent’s determination                
          letter and thereafter, had to wait for Compliance to file a Form            
          W-2 with respondent and send one to him.  Both lines of                     
          petitioner’s reasoning are wrong.  During 2001, petitioner was              
          treated by Compliance as an independent contractor.  No Federal             
          income tax was withheld from his wages.  Accordingly, petitioner            
          was under an obligation to remit estimated payments pursuant to             
          section 6654(c) and (d).  The fact that respondent ultimately               
          determined petitioner was a Compliance employee does not negate             
          petitioner’s failure to make these payments when they were due in           
          2001.                                                                       






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011