Ferm v. Comm'r

2014 T.C. Summary Opinion 115, 2014 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 117
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedDecember 30, 2014
DocketDocket No. 19107-13S.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2014 T.C. Summary Opinion 115 (Ferm 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.

Bluebook
Ferm v. Comm'r, 2014 T.C. Summary Opinion 115, 2014 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 117 (tax 2014).

Opinion

JOHN MARK FERM AND BRENDA KAY FERM, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Ferm v. Comm'r
Docket No. 19107-13S.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Summary Opinion 2014-115; 2014 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 117;
December 30, 2014, Filed

PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b), THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.

Decision will be entered under Rule 155.

*117 John Mark Ferm and Brenda Kay Ferm, Pro se.
Jeremy J. Eggerth and John C. Schmittdiel, for respondent.
MARVEL, Judge.

MARVEL
SUMMARY OPINION

MARVEL, Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of section 74631 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect when the petition was filed. Pursuant to section 7463(b), the decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion shall not be treated as precedent for any other case.

In a notice of deficiency dated June 13, 2013, respondent determined a Federal income tax deficiency of $3,662 for petitioners' 2011 taxable year after they filed an amended return. After concessions by respondent,2*118 the only issue remaining is whether petitioners are entitled to an American opportunity credit in an amount greater than that allowed by respondent.

Background

Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found. The stipulated facts and facts drawn from stipulated exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. Petitioners, who are married to each other, resided in Minnesota when they filed the petition.

Petitioner wife's daughter, H.A., graduated from high school in June 2010 and subsequently enrolled in North Hennepin Community College. She began classes in the fall 2010 semester. For the spring 2011 semester, which began in early January, H.A.'s account statement from the college shows charges for the following:

ItemAmount
Resident tuition$2,113.16
Parking44.80
Student life fee70.00
Technology fee84.00
MSCSA4.34
Professional development
Occ/professional course fees50.00

The statement also shows that three payments were made toward the spring 2011 charges: $2,150.85 received on December 28,*119 2010; $50 received on January 3, 2011; and $165.45 received on May 6, 2011. Petitioners made these payments on H.A.'s behalf by taking distributions from their qualified tuition program account, also known as a section 529 plan account, and then remitting payments to the college with a debit/credit card.

Petitioners, who are cash method taxpayers, timely filed a joint Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, for taxable year 2011. On April 1, 2013, respondent received from petitioners a Form 1040X, Amended U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, for the 2011 taxable year, reflecting adjustments made as a result of respondent's examination. On their Form 1040X petitioners claimed an American opportunity credit of $2,1073 for H.A.'s education expenses.4*120

On June 13, 2013, respondent sent petitioners a notice of deficiency disallowing the American opportunity credit for lack of payment verification. On August 19, 2013, petitioners timely filed a petition in this Court disputing respondent's disallowance of the credit. At trial respondent conceded $157 of the claimed credit. The remaining amount is in dispute.

DiscussionI. Burden of Proof

Generally, the Commissioner's determinations in a notice of deficiency are presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving that the determinations are erroneous. See Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). The burden of proof shifts to the Commissioner, however, if the taxpayer produces credible evidence with respect to any factual issue relevant to ascertaining the taxpayer's liability for any tax imposed by subtitle A or B of the Code and the taxpayer satisfies the requirements of section 7491(a)(2).5*121 Sec. 7491(a)(1).

Petitioners do not contend that section 7491(a)(1) applies, and the record does not permit us to conclude that they satisfied the section 7491(a)(2) requirements.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Welch v. Helvering
290 U.S. 111 (Supreme Court, 1933)
HIGBEE v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
116 T.C. No. 28 (U.S. Tax Court, 2001)
Michaels v. Commissioner
87 T.C. No. 81 (U.S. Tax Court, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2014 T.C. Summary Opinion 115, 2014 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ferm-v-commr-tax-2014.