- 5 -
these arguments have some colorable merit.” Crain v.
Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417, 1417 (5th Cir. 1984); see, e.g.,
Wetzel v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-211 (rejecting as
frivolous the argument that the taxpayer was not a taxpayer);
Nunn v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-250 (rejecting as without
merit the argument that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction over
the taxpayer or his documents). We reject petitioner’s tax-
protester arguments as frivolous and without merit.4
Under Rule 91(f), it was deemed stipulated that petitioner
received $7,371 of wage income, $12,315 of interest income, and
$35,999 from early retirement plan distributions. It was further
stipulated that petitioner did not meet any of the exceptions to
the 10-percent additional tax imposed by section 72(t) on the
early distributions. Petitioner has presented no evidence that
indicates respondent’s determination is incorrect. Therefore, we
hold that petitioner has a Federal income tax deficiency of
$12,899 for 2002.
4 Petitioner also argued that he was “improperly denied a
collections due process hearing”. This argument likewise has no
merit. Petitioner filed his petition in response to the notice
of deficiency, and respondent has not taken any collection
action. Thus, petitioner is not entitled to a collection hearing
at this point. See secs. 6320, 6330.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011