-4-
distribution as income in 2004, that petitioner was liable for
the 10-percent additional tax on the distribution under section
72(t), and that petitioner was liable for the accuracy-related
penalty. Petitioner timely filed a petition.
Discussion
We are asked to consider whether petitioner was required to
include the distribution from his retirement account in his
income for 2004, the year he received it, or 2005, the year he
intended to spend it. We are also asked to consider whether
petitioner is liable for the 10-percent additional tax on the
distribution under section 72(t) and whether petitioner is liable
for the accuracy-related penalty. We shall finally consider
whether to impose a penalty on petitioner under section 6673. We
shall consider each of these issues in turn.2
I. Whether the Distribution Is Includable in Income for 2004
We first consider whether petitioner should have included
the distribution from his retirement account in his income for
2004, the year he received the distribution. We begin by
outlining the governing law.
Gross income includes all income from whatever source
derived. Sec. 61(a). This includes items included under section
72 (relating to annuities and retirement accounts). Sec. 61(b).
2Petitioner does not claim the burden of proof shifts to
respondent under sec. 7491(a). Petitioner also did not establish
he satisfies the requirements of sec. 7491(a)(2). We therefore
find that the burden of proof remains with petitioner as to any
factual issue affecting his liability for the deficiency in his
tax.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007