Cutshall v. Comm'r
This text of 2007 T.C. Summary Opinion 84 (Cutshall v. Comm'r) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
*85 PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b), THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.
DEAN, Special Trial Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of
Respondent determined for 2003 a deficiency in petitioner's Federal income tax of $ 678. After concessions, 1 the sole issue for decision is whether petitioner is entitled to claim a business loss deduction of $ 10,000 on Schedule C, Profit or Loss From Business.
*86 BACKGROUND
The exhibits received into evidence are incorporated herein by reference. At the time the petition in this case was filed, petitioner resided in York, Pennsylvania.
Petitioner filed separately from his spouse, a Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, for 2003. On Schedule C petitioner claimed a deduction of $ 10,000 for a business loss from the taxable year 1982.
Respondent issued to petitioner a statutory notice of deficiency for 2003 disallowing the claimed deduction for lack of substantiation.
DISCUSSION
The Commissioner's determinations are presumed correct, and generally taxpayers bear the burden of proving otherwise.2
*87 In 1982, petitioner leased a parcel of land on which he and his family ran a small produce stand out of a moveable type structure. Petitioner contends that, despite his lease, a "group of lawyers" wanted to build a motel on the land. Petitioner claims that when he refused to move, "they took a truck in and took everything that I had". As a result, petitioner's produce stand was forced to shut down, and petitioner allegedly sustained a business loss of $ 10,000.
On his 1982 return, petitioner claimed a business loss of $ 10,000 for his produce stand. Petitioner's testimony suggests that he expected the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to reimburse him, in actual dollars, for the business loss claimed on the return. When petitioner did not receive any form of response from the IRS, he continued to claim a business loss of $ 10,000 on each and every return that he filed with the IRS after 1982 because he wanted "a sense of fairness from the IRS."
Petitioner complained on part V of Schedule C for 2003 that the IRS has never given him a business loss, that the "mafia lawyer" stole all he owned, and that he has fought with "them" for 25 years.
Contrary to petitioner's belief, he was apparently*88 allowed a business loss deduction of $ 10,000 for each year from 1982 to 2002. Under
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2007 T.C. Summary Opinion 84, 2007 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 85, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cutshall-v-commr-tax-2007.