Glover v. Comm'r

2010 T.C. Memo. 228, 100 T.C.M. 342, 2010 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 262
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedOctober 20, 2010
DocketDocket Nos. 1350-08, 3931-08, 5031-08.
StatusUnpublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 2010 T.C. Memo. 228 (Glover 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
Glover v. Comm'r, 2010 T.C. Memo. 228, 100 T.C.M. 342, 2010 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 262 (tax 2010).

Opinion

PHILIP S. GLOVER, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Glover v. Comm'r
Docket Nos. 1350-08, 3931-08, 5031-08.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 2010-228; 2010 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 262; 100 T.C.M. (CCH) 342;
October 20, 2010, Filed
*262

Decisions will be entered for respondent.

Philip S. Glover, Pro se.
Timothy B. Heavner, for respondent.
PARIS, Judge.

PARIS
MEMORANDUM OPINION

PARIS, Judge: Respondent issued separate notices of deficiency for tax years 2004, 2005, and 2006 (the tax years at issue), determining deficiencies in petitioner's income tax and additions to tax under sections 6651(a)(1) and (2) and 6654. 1 Petitioner timely filed separate petitions with the Court for the tax years at issue, challenging the deficiencies and additions to tax. 2

These cases present five issues: (1) Whether petitioner received taxable income during the tax years at issue that he failed to report, causing deficiencies in income tax; (2) whether petitioner is liable for additions to tax for failing to file returns; (3) whether petitioner is liable for additions to tax for failing to pay taxes; (4) whether petitioner is liable for additions to tax for failing to pay estimated taxes; and (5) whether petitioner is liable for a penalty *263 for asserting a frivolous or groundless position.

Background

Some of the facts have been stipulated and are found accordingly. The stipulations of facts and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. Petitioner resided in Norfolk, Virginia, at the time he filed the petitions.

During the tax years at issue petitioner received payments totaling $52,257.21, $83,532.45, and $77,531.13, respectively, for services he performed. Petitioner received Forms W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, for the payments. The Forms W-2 listed the amounts of the payments and the amounts withheld for income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes. Petitioner also received an $849 State tax refund and $10 of interest income in tax year 2004, as well as $14 of interest income in tax year 2005.

Petitioner did not file a Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, for any tax year at issue. 3 Rather, he prepared a Form 1041, U.S. Income Tax Return for Estates and Trusts, for each tax year at issue and submitted them for filing. 4 Petitioner claims that the Forms 1041 are trust agreements he executed for the tax years at issue. On each Form 1041, petitioner reported (1) the payments he received for services *264 during the respective tax year as trust income, (2) a $300 exemption, 5 (3) a deduction for fiduciary fees in an amount that zeroed out his tax liability, and (4) the amounts withheld for income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes. Petitioner requested a refund of the amounts withheld. Petitioner made no payments of Federal income tax for the tax years at issue other than the amounts withheld.

Respondent rejected the Forms 1041, claiming that they did not constitute valid returns. 6*265 Respondent prepared substitutes for returns for the tax years at issue pursuant to section 6020(b) and determined deficiencies and additions to tax based on the section 6020(b) returns.

DiscussionI. Taxable Income

Respondent determined that petitioner received taxable wages during the tax years at issue that he failed to report. Under section 61(a)(1), "Compensation for services" and wages constitute gross income. Abrams v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 403, 407 (1984); see Capps v. Eggers, 782 F.2d 1341, 1343 (5th Cir. 1986); United States v. Romero, 640 F.2d 1014, 1016 (9th Cir. 1981); Rowlee v. Commissioner,

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

Related

Salina Jivani v. Commissioner
2018 T.C. Summary Opinion 20 (U.S. Tax Court, 2018)
Niski v. Comm'r
2017 T.C. Summary Opinion 33 (U.S. Tax Court, 2017)
Biggers v. Internal Revenue Service
557 B.R. 589 (M.D. Tennessee, 2016)
Briggs v. United States (In re Briggs)
511 B.R. 707 (N.D. Georgia, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2010 T.C. Memo. 228, 100 T.C.M. 342, 2010 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glover-v-commr-tax-2010.