Tobias Weiss and Gertrude O. Weiss - Page 3




                                        - 3 -                                         
          respondent summarily assessed $80,330 of tax on this “corrected”            
          taxable income, after making the “math error” adjustments and               
          associated mathematical adjustments.3  Using this same                      
          “corrected” taxable income, respondent also recomputed                      
          petitioner’s alternative minimum tax.  By statutory notice of               
          deficiency, respondent determined that petitioners had a                    
          resulting deficiency of $6,073 (apart from the tax that                     
          respondent had summarily assessed pursuant to section 6213(b)).             
                                     Discussion                                       
               Petitioners contend that they correctly reported their                 
          qualified dividends on their 2005 Form 1040 and correctly                   
          calculated and paid tax on those qualified dividends at the rate            
          of 15 percent.4  Petitioners contend that respondent erred in               
          determining that the qualified dividends should be included in              
          the calculation of their alternative minimum tax.                           




               2(...continued)                                                        
          petitioners conceded these two other math errors.                           
               3 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to            
          the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year at issue.                  
               4 In summarily assessing petitioners’ tax on their                     
          “corrected” taxable income, respondent also computed tax on the             
          qualified dividends at 15 percent and credited petitioners with             
          the 15-percent tax they had separately reported on line 45.  In             
          this proceeding, petitioners do not challenge the summary                   
          assessment, which is beyond the scope of our jurisdiction.  See             
          sec. 6213(b)(1); Meyer v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 555, 559-560                
          (1991).                                                                     





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: March 27, 2008