James McGaffin, III v. CIR
This text of James McGaffin, III v. CIR (James McGaffin, III v. CIR) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
_____________
No. 96-3528 _____________
James M. McGaffin, III, and * Deborah McGaffin, * * Appellant, * * v. * On Appeal from the * United States Tax Court. * Commissioner of Internal * Revenue, * * Appellee. * ___________
Submitted: April 14, 1997
Filed: April 22, 1997 ___________
Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Chief Judge, FAGG and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ___________
RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Chief Judge.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, ministers and other members of the clergy can receive an exemption from self-employment tax if they are conscientiously opposed to the tax and if they file a request for the exemption, called a Form 4361, by a certain specified time. The question presented in this case is whether the taxpayers, the Reverend and Mrs. James McGaffin, III, appellants in this Court, made a timely filing of their Form 4361. The Tax Court1 found against them, and they appeal.
We affirm. The question whether the form was filed on time is a question of fact. The taxpayers had the burden of proof. After a trial, the Tax Court found that the form was not mailed on time. Mr. McGaffin testified that it was mailed on time, on April l5, 1986, along with his income-tax return for the year 1985. The records of the Internal Revenue Service, on the other hand, show that the income-tax return was not received until June 9, 1986. There is no record of the Form 4361's ever being received. The Tax Court was convinced that the Form 4361 was mailed along with the income-tax return, crediting Mr. McGaffin’s testimony to this extent, but it was not convinced that the form and the return were mailed on April 15, 1986, which was the deadline for the filing of the form.
The finding of the Tax Court is not clearly erroneous. It was not required to believe all of Mr. McGaffin’s testimony. As the trier of fact with both live and documentary evidence before it, it was open to the Tax Court to conclude that the taxpayer’s memory was faulty. The judgment is
Affirmed.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
1 James M. McGaffin, III, T.C. Memo. 1996-290 (June 24, 1996) (John F. Dean, Special Trial Judge).
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
James McGaffin, III v. CIR, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-mcgaffin-iii-v-cir-ca8-1997.