Webster v. Comm'r

2006 T.C. Memo. 144, 92 T.C.M. 15, 2006 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 144
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedJuly 6, 2006
DocketNo. 24277-04
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2006 T.C. Memo. 144 (Webster 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
Webster v. Comm'r, 2006 T.C. Memo. 144, 92 T.C.M. 15, 2006 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 144 (tax 2006).

Opinion

JOHN H. WEBSTER, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Webster v. Comm'r
No. 24277-04
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 2006-144; 2006 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 144; 92 T.C.M. (CCH) 15; RIA TM 56563;
July 6, 2006, Filed
*144 John H. Webster, pro se.
Huong T. Duong, for respondent.
Vasquez, Juan F.

Juan F. Vasquez

MEMORANDUM OPINION

VASQUEZ, Judge: This case is before the Court on respondent's motion for summary judgment and to impose a penalty under section 6673. 1

Respondent determined a deficiency of $ 22,285 in petitioner's 1998 Federal income tax, a section 6651(a)(1) addition to tax of $ 10,585.38, and a section 6654(a) addition to tax of $ 1,011.45. In his answer, respondent adjusted the amount of the section 6651(a)(1) addition to tax to $ 5,571.25. 2

*145 The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner is liable for the deficiency determined by respondent; (2) whether petitioner is liable for the failure to file addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1); (3) whether petitioner is liable for the failure to pay estimated tax addition to tax under section 6654(a); and (4) whether petitioner is liable for the penalty pursuant to section 6673.

Background

Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found. The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. At the time he filed the petition, petitioner resided in Santa Clara, California.

In 1998, petitioner received $ 68,532 from Focaltron Corporation as nonemployee compensation and $ 32 from Wells Fargo Bank as interest income.

Petitioner admits that he did not file a Federal income tax return for tax year 1998 and did not make any payments for tax year 1998.

Discussion

I. Motion for Summary Judgment

Rule 121(a) provides that either party may move for summary judgment upon all or any part of the legal issues in controversy. Summary judgment may be granted if it is demonstrated that no genuine issue exists as to any material fact and*146 a decision may be rendered as a matter of law. Rule 121(b); Sundstrand Corp. v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 518, 520 (1992), affd. 17 F.3d 965 (7th Cir. 1994). As the party who moved for summary judgment, respondent has the burden of showing there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Nis Family Trust v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 523, 536, 537-538 (2000).

We conclude that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that a decision may be rendered as a matter of law.

II. The Deficiency

Section 61 defines gross income as all income from whatever source derived. Gross income includes, among other things, compensation for services and interest. Sec. 61(a).

Petitioner admits that he received the income listed in the notice of deficiency. However, petitioner contends, inter alia, that:

All Fedral [sic] income taxes levyed [sic] against me from 1998 to the present should be voided since during this time I have not been a tax filer or tax payer [sic] as defined in the US Tax Code, nor has any of the moneys I received resulted from interstate commerence [sic] or otherwise*147 met the definition of "Taxable Gross Income" per that Tax Code. To make sure that I have not missed anything I have specifically requested that the IRS notify me of any law or code that actually requires me to file or pay Federal Income Tax.

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

Related

Leyshon v. Comm'r
2015 T.C. Memo. 104 (U.S. Tax Court, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2006 T.C. Memo. 144, 92 T.C.M. 15, 2006 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/webster-v-commr-tax-2006.