- 3 -
(1) Whether petitioner is liable for deficiencies for her
taxable years 1999 and 2000;
(2) whether petitioner is liable for penalties under section
6662(a) for her taxable years 1999 and 2000; and
(3) whether the Court should impose a penalty, sua sponte,
under section 6673.
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. Background
Some of the facts have been deemed stipulated pursuant to
Rule 91(f) and are so found.3 The stipulated facts, with
accompanying exhibits, are incorporated in our findings by this
reference. At the time this petition was filed, petitioner
resided in Gilbert, Arizona.
2(...continued)
As to respondent’s concession, this Court has the discretion
to accept or reject an offered concession. McGowan v.
Commissioner, 67 T.C. 599, 604-607 (1976)(“All concessions,
including stipulated settlement agreements, are subject to the
Court’s discretionary review. Only through this process can the
interests of justice be protected.” Id. at 607.). In this case,
we reject $10,308 of respondent’s concession due to the
mathematical calculation error.
3 Petitioner objected to many of the paragraphs in the
Stipulation of Facts as well as questions from respondent during
direct examination on Fifth Amendment grounds. The Court
informed petitioner on more than one occasion that even if it was
found to be applicable, she was not permitted to use the Fifth
Amendment privilege as both a sword and a shield. See United
States v. Rylander, 460 U.S. 752, 758 (1983); Ruocco v.
Commissioner, 346 F.3d 223, 224 (1st Cir. 2003), affg. T.C. Memo.
2002-91; Lehmann v. Commissioner, 63 Fed. Appx. 412, 413 (9th
Cir. 2003); see also infra Part II, Petitioner’s Fifth Amendment
Claims.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011