MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
STERRETT, Judge: Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioner's Federal income taxes as follows:
| | Addition to Tax | Addition to Tax |
| | Under | Under |
| Year | Deficiency | Section 6651(a)(1) | Section 6653(a) |
| 1969 | $4,016.24 | $1,004.06 | $200.81 |
| 1970 | 3,779.10 | 944.78 | 188.96 |
The issues for decision are: (1) whether petitioner's receipt of Federal reserve notes constituted taxable income to him; (2) if so, whether respondent's reconstruction of petitioner's income was erroneous; (3) whether petitioner is liable for additions to tax under sections 6651(a) and 6653(a), I.R. C., 1954; and (4) whether respondent's actions violated petitioner's constitutional rights.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Raymond M. Hartman, hereinafter, petitioner, resided in Beaver, Pennsylvania at the time he filed his petition herein.
For his taxable year 1969 petitioner filed a Form 1040 dated April 15, 1970 on which he stated only his name, address, occupation, social security number, and filing status (single). On a single sheet attachment he stated that no other information was being furnished based on the "common law, Declaration of Independence, United States and Pennsylvania Constitutions," and on various sections of the United States Code. Under date of May 8, 1971 petitioner submitted a document he wished to be considered as part of his 1969 return together with $20 (which petitioner termed "fiat paper"). The document comprises photocopies of portions of a Form 1040, arguments that dollars are bogus and that the Federal Reserve System contravenes the United States Constitution. On page 4 petitioner states:
The money of account of the United States as expressed in Dollars or Units, dimes or tenths, cents or hundreths, and mills or thousandths, as coined by Congress with Congress fixing the Standard of weights and measures thereof for the year in question are as follows:
| Gold Eagles, Units or Dollars | No. | $ |
| Silver Dollars | No. 90 | $ ? |
| Silver Half Dollars | No. 176 | $ ? |
| Silver Quarters | No. 956 | $ ? |
| Silver Half Dimes | No. | $ |
| Nickles | No. 1900 | $ ? |
| Pennies or Cents | No. 1000 | $ ? |
| Silver Dimes | No. 195700 | $ ? |
TOTAL INCOME AS EXPRESSED IN MONIES OF ACCOUNT OF THE U.S. $ . 1
The document contains nothing relevant to petitioner's income or deductions for 1969.
Under date of April 15, 1971, petitioner submitted a document to the internal revenue service which he requested to be considered as his 1970 income tax return. This document is virtually identical to that dated May 8, 1971. On page 4 of the April 15 document petitioner states:
The money of account of the United States as expressed in Dollars or Units, dismes or tenths, cents or hundreths, and mills or thousandths, as coined by Congress with Congress fixing the Standard of weights and measures thereof for the year in question are as follows:
| Gold Eagles, Units or Dollars | No. | $ |
| Silver Dollars | No. 109.00 | $ ? |
| Silver Half Dollars | No. 94.00 | $ ? |
| Silver Quarters | No. 104.00 | $ ? |
| Silver Half Dimes | No. | $ |
| Nickles | No. 80.80 | $ ? |
| Pennies or Cents | No. 35.40 | $ ? |
| Silver Dimes | No. 189.10 | $ ? |
TOTAL INCOME AS EXPRESSED IN MONIES OF ACCOUNT OF THE U.S.$ ?
On June 19, 1972 respondent issued his notice of deficiency. The deficiency was computed by averaging petitioner's net profits and other income for 1968 in order to reach an average adjusted gross income. This figure, a standard deduction, and a personal exemption were used to compute petitioner's unreported taxable income.
Petitioner has refused to cooperate with respondent's agents and has consistently denied them access to his books and records.
OPINION
Petitioner filed various documents with the internal revenue service which he concedes are not valid returns. It is his position that the Federal Reserve notes that he received do not constitute income because they are not dollars within the meaning of Title 31 U.S.C., 2 in that they are devoid of intrinsic value since they cannot be redeemed in gold or silver. Hence, he concludes that having received no "dollars" he is not required to file a return under section 6012.
We have on numerous occasions rejected this argument. Loren R. Gajewski,67 T.C. 181 (1976); Edward A. Cupp,65 T.C. 68 (1975), on appeal (3rd Cir. July 26, 1976). The thrust of these decisions was that Federal Reserve notes are dollars for tax purposes and that the statutory gold content of the dollar was irrelevant for the purposes of computing taxable income. Petitioner's arguments are identical to those rejected in Gajewski and Cupp. We adhere to those decisions and again reject them in the instant case.
Petitioner has also advanced a myriad of constitutional arguments for our consideration. We have previously rejected these contentions in connection with numerous motions made by petitioner and in our earlier decision herein. Raymond M. Hartman,65 T.C. 542 (1975). Petitioner has failed to provide us with a sound basis for reversing our decision, and we continue to reject his arguments.
With respect to the substantive issues, to wit petitioner's tax liability and the additions to tax, the burden of proof rests on petitioner's shoulders. Raymond M. Hartman,supra. We do not doubt petitioner's sincerity. However, despite repeated warnings by the Court he refused to proffer evidence relating to his tax liability just as he had refused to cooperate with respondent's agents. He has consequently failed to meet his burden of proof and
Decision will be entered for the Respondent.