-2-
from his retirement account in his income in 2004. We hold that
he should have included the distribution in income in 2004. The
second issue is whether petitioner is liable for the 10-percent
additional tax on the distribution from his retirement account
under section 72(t). We hold that he is. The third issue is
whether petitioner is liable for the accuracy-related penalty
under section 6662. We hold that he is. The fourth issue is
whether we should impose a penalty on petitioner under section
6673. We hold that we shall not impose a penalty in this case,
but caution petitioner that he is at risk of a penalty if he
brings similar arguments before the Court in the future.
Background
This case was submitted fully stipulated pursuant to Rule
122, and the facts are so found. The stipulation of facts, the
supplemental stipulation of facts, and the accompanying exhibits
are incorporated by this reference. Petitioner resided in
Humansville, Missouri, at the time he filed the petition.
Petitioner was the superintendent of schools for the
Humansville R-IV school district in Humansville, Missouri.
Petitioner had a retirement account with the school district
regarding his employment, which account was administered by the
Public School Retirement System of Missouri (PSRS). The parties
agree that the PSRS retirement plan was a qualified plan under
section 401(a).
Petitioner’s employment was terminated in September 2004.
After the termination, petitioner contacted PSRS to determine how
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007