Wayne Curtis Siron - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                         

                    PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Tax Court Rule                
               90, a written answer to these requests must be filed                   
               with the Tax Court and a copy served on the undersigned                
               within 30 days after service of these requests for                     
               admission.                                                             

          Also on August 26, 2005, respondent lodged a response to                    
          petitioner’s requests for admission.  As petitioner had filed no            
          request for admission with this Court, as of that date,5  the               
          Court ordered petitioner to file a request for admission by                 
          September 26, 2005.  However, petitioner failed to file such a              
          request for admission in compliance with the Court’s order.                 
          Instead, on September 26, 2005, petitioner filed a response to              
          respondent’s request for admissions.  Petitioner admitted that he           
          was married to Rose Siron throughout 1998, that he resided in               
          Blythewood, South Carolina, at the time of filing the petition,             
          that FN Manufacturing paid petitioner compensation of $27,011               
          during 1998, that the State Board paid petitioner compensation              
          of $323 during 1998, and that the State Board withheld Federal              
          income tax of $8.  However, with respect to respondent’s requests           


               5Respondent submitted to the Court a document purporting to            
          be “Petitioner’s First Request for Admissions” as an exhibit to             
          respondent’s motion to show cause why proposed facts and evidence           
          should not be accepted as established.  The document was signed             
          by petitioner and dated Aug. 29, 2005, but was not filed with               
          this Court by petitioner.  The document contained a series of               
          incoherent and illogical arguments purporting to rely on the 16th           
          Amendment, the Internal Revenue Code, and Supreme Court                     
          decisions.                                                                  





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011