Steven R. Olmos - Page 14




                                        - 14 -                                         
          every level.  Additionally, while petitioner did not raise                   
          typical tax-protester arguments, petitioner’s actions and his                
          failure to introduce any evidence to support his claims closely              
          mirrors the tactics of many tax protesters.  However, petitioner             
          was not warned until the conclusion of this case that a penalty              
          might be imposed under section 6673(a)(1).  For this reason only,            
          we decline to impose a penalty under section 6673(a)(1).  We                 
          strongly admonish petitioner that if he persists in using tactics            
          of delay or in failing to cooperate with respondent in                       
          proceedings hereafter, the Court will not be so favorably                    
          inclined in the future.                                                      
               In reaching our holdings, we have considered all arguments              
          made, and, to the extent not mentioned above, we conclude that               
          they are moot, irrelevant, or without merit.                                 
               To reflect the foregoing,                                               

                                                   An appropriate order                
                                              and decision will be entered             
                                              under Rule 155.                          
















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

Last modified: November 10, 2007