- 6 - without prejudice on April 21, 2004. Belmont v. United States, 93 AFTR 2d 2004-1992 (N.D. Ohio 2004). Petitioner timely mailed his petition to this Court on May 19, 2004, and it was filed on May 25, 2004. See sec. 6330(d)(1); sec. 301.6330-1(f), Proced. & Admin. Regs. On March 27, 2006, petitioner filed with the Court a response to the stipulation of facts, wherein he stated that he no longer subscribed to his previous tax-protester arguments. OPINION Because the underlying tax liability is not at issue, this Court’s review under section 6330 is for abuse of discretion. See Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114. T.C. 176, 182 (2000). This standard requires the Court to decide whether respondent’s determination was arbitrary, capricious, or without sound basis in fact or law. Woodral v. Commissioner, 112 T.C. 19, 23 (1999); Keller v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-166; Fowler v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-163. Throughout this case, petitioner presented tax-protester arguments, including: (1) He is not a taxpayer; (2) respondent has no jurisdiction over him; 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 copiousPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011