Yvonne Thomas - Page 6
- 6 -
should be treated as a mere “math error” which, under the above
IRM provision, should be treated as an administrative adjustment
automatically in issue under section 6330(c)(1) and (c)(3)(C).
Further, petitioner refers to the mandate of the Americans
With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Pub. L. 101-336, 104 Stat.
327, currently codified as 42 U.S.C. secs. 12101-12213 (2000), to
the general effect that disabled persons be given equal access to
governmental agencies, and petitioner argues that because she has
medical disabilities, the ADA overrides the period of limitations
of section 6213(a) and the jurisdictional limitation of section
6330(c)(2)(B), and she should be allowed to raise an issue as to
her correct Federal income tax liability.
At the March 26, 2007, Court hearing on the instant motions
in limine, petitioner’s counsel claimed to have in his possession
corrected brokerage account information showing that all 2002
stock sales that properly are to be charged to petitioner
resulted in a net loss.
We briefly discuss our reasons for rejecting petitioner’s
various arguments and for granting respondent’s motion in limine.
Upon receipt of the notice of deficiency petitioner filed a
police report. Obviously, petitioner could have chosen in
addition, or in lieu thereof, to file a Tax Court petition.
Petitioner made that choice. Petitioner’s explanation for not
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Last modified: November 10, 2007