- 8 -
Throughout this case, petitioner also presented
tax-protester arguments, including: (1) Respondent has no
jurisdiction over him; (2) the Internal Revenue Service has not
complied with the Paperwork Reduction Act; and (3) respondent
lacks authority to assert income tax deficiencies. Petitioner’s
assertions have been rejected by this Court and other courts, and
“We perceive no need to refute these arguments with somber
reasoning and copious citation of precedent; to do so might
suggest that these arguments have some colorable merit.” Crain
v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417, 1417 (5th Cir. 1984); see, e.g.,
Wheeler v. Commissioner, 127 T.C. 200, 204 n.9 (2006) (rejecting
as without merit the argument that the requirement to file a tax
return is in violation of the Paperwork Reduction Act); Nunn v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-250 (rejecting as without merit the
argument that the Federal income tax is unconstitutional). This
Court rejects petitioner’s tax-protester arguments as frivolous
and without merit. Because petitioner did not raise a valid
claim, such as a spousal defense or an alternative means of
collection, such claims are deemed to be conceded. See Rule
331(b)(4).
Petitioner’s arguments do not present justiciable issues;
they ignore established law and give no basis for his claim that
respondent abused his discretion in sustaining the Federal tax
lien. This Court concludes that respondent’s determination to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007