- 6 -
petitioner was periodically cashing large checks written to cash.9
Because Revenue Agent Nichols had no payroll records for
petitioner for 2000 and 2001, she relied on the best information
available to her--the Forms W-2, 940, and 941 from 1999--to
calculate the wages paid and tax owed by petitioner for 2000 and
2001.
On November 26, 2003, respondent issued a notice of
determination to petitioner in which he determined that
petitioner had nine workers during 2000 and 2001 whom it should
have treated as employees, that petitioner was not entitled to
relief under act section 530, that petitioner was liable for
income tax withholding, FICA and FUTA tax, the section 6651(a)(1)
addition to tax, and the section 6662 accuracy-related penalty
for each of the periods involved. Petitioner filed a timely
petition challenging the determinations.
On January 25, 2006, respondent filed requests for admission
with this Court and mailed a copy to petitioner. However,
because the certificate of service used an address for petitioner
that was different from the address for petitioner in the Court’s
files, we served a copy of the requests for admission on
petitioner at its address as shown in the Court’s files on
January 30, 2006. See Rule 90.
9Revenue Agent Nichols testified that in her experience, a
pattern of periodically cashing large checks written to cash
suggested a practice of paying workers in cash.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007