- 26 -
Petitioner was required to file a return for tax year 2003,
and he appears to concede this point. See secs. 6011(a),
6012(a). To determine whether a document that a taxpayer files
constitutes a valid return for purposes of section 6651(a), we
follow the test in Beard v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 766, 777
(1984), affd. 793 F.2d 139 (6th Cir. 1986). Under the Beard
test, a document constitutes a “return” only if it meets four
requirements:
First, there must be sufficient data to calculate tax
liability; second, the document must purport to be a
return; third, there must be an honest and reasonable
attempt to satisfy the requirements of the tax law; and
fourth, the taxpayer must execute the return under
penalties of perjury.
Respondent concedes that petitioner satisfied the second and
fourth requirements by filing two documents that purported to be
tax returns and by executing both documents under penalties of
perjury. However, respondent asserts that neither the Form 1040A
nor the Form 1040NR petitioner submitted constitutes a “return”
within the meaning of the Beard test because neither form
contains sufficient data to calculate tax liability and neither
form indicates that petitioner made an honest and reasonable
attempt to satisfy the requirements of the tax law. Petitioner
does not argue that the unsigned proposed Form 1040 constitutes a
return.
This Court has held that a Federal income tax return
containing only zero entries, particularly when accompanied by
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007