Wilber v. Commissioner

1987 T.C. Memo. 439, 54 T.C.M. 380, 1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 436
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedAugust 31, 1987
DocketDocket No. 8163-86.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1987 T.C. Memo. 439 (Wilber v. Commissioner) 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
Wilber v. Commissioner, 1987 T.C. Memo. 439, 54 T.C.M. 380, 1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 436 (tax 1987).

Opinion

DAVID BYRON WILBER, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Wilber v. Commissioner
Docket No. 8163-86.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1987-439; 1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 436; 54 T.C.M. (CCH) 380; T.C.M. (RIA) 87439;
August 31, 1987.
Robert J. Burbank, for the respondent.

FAY

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

FAY, Judge: Respondent determined deficiencies in and additions to petitioner's Federal income tax as follows:

ADDITIONS TO TAX
SectionSection
YearDeficiency6654 16653(b)
1977$ 16,546$ 195$ 8,273
197821,26069210,630

The sole issue is whether*437 respondent's determination of section 6653(b) additions to tax should be sustained.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts have been deemed stipulated and are found accordingly. The stipulation of facts and the exhibits attached thereto are incorporated herein by reference.

Petitioner resided in St. Louis, Missouri, at the time his petition herein was filed. Petitioner filed no returns for the years in issue. Petitioner is married, but his wife is not a party to this case. Petitioner, though having only a tenth-grade education, is an intelligent sophisticated businessman.

From approximately 1964 to 1970, petitioner worked as a real estate agent. In 1970, after passing the appropriate test, petitioner became a real estate broker licensed by the State of Missouri. As of the time of trial, petitioner continued to be a licensed real estate broker.

From 1970 to 1978, petitioner operated his real estate brokerage business through a wholly owned corporation, Dave Wilber Realty, Inc. ("Realty"). Realty's corporate charter expired at the end of 1977, and since then petitioner has operated his real estate brokerage business as a sole proprietorship.

Petitioner filed valid*438 income tax returns for the 1973 through 1976 calendar years. Realty filed valid income tax returns for the 1975 and 1976 calendar years. Realty filed a 1977 tax return valid in all respects except that the following statement was made on the return:

The numbers shown herein are nothing but numbers and in no way does filer of return acknowledge any income nor assets nor receipts in dollars of gold or silver coin as per Art. 1, Sec. 10, U.S. Constitution and Coinage Acts, 1792-1900.

This statement reflects petitioner's misconception, acquired some time around 1976, that "dollar" is an indefinable term and that he cannot measure his income, file returns, or pay tax until "dollar" is defined. As a result of his misconception, petitioner failed to file returns during the years at issue, though he had taxable income in each of such years in excess of $ 30,000.

In October of 1978, the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") began an audit of petitioner's 1977 and 1978 taxable years. Petitioner maintained throughout the audit his frivolous position with respect to the indefinable "dollar." In a letter sent to respondent's agent, and later published in the South County News newspaper as*439 an open letter to the IRS, petitioner denied a request by the agent to examine petitioner's and Realty's books and a request for a meeting stating:

I am sorry * * * but there is no useful purpose in your viewing my records. * * * the records are meaningless. There are no records that I paid or received any dollar quantities of the money of account of the United States unless you want to inform me that monetized debt units * * * are by law, the money of account of the United States * * *.

Petitioner never did provide respondent access to his or Realty's books.

In reaction to the IRS's issuance of summonses to third parties or petitioner's belief that the IRS would issue summonses to third parties, petitioner sent such third parties "warnings" threatening a civil suit should they provide the IRS with information before requiring the IRS to define "dollar." In a letter sent to a financial institution with regard to a summons issued by respondent to such financial institution, petitioner again threatened a law suit should the financial institution provide the IRS with information without regard to the "fact" that the dollar is indefinable.

Prior to and during the years at issue, *440 petitioner and his wife maintained a joint checking account. In 1977, petitioner opened a checking account using his middle and last names, Byron Wilber. Petitioner informed his tenants to begin making rental payments checks payable to Byron Wilber.

In 1981, petitioner authorized a newsletter espousing his views on the indefinable dollar, attached to which was a pamphlet which advocated the use of cash to avoid detection by the IRS of individuals' money transfers. Petitioner practiced what he preached in that he, to an extent, dealt in cash and avoided banks and checking accounts.

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

Related

John C. Raley v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
676 F.2d 980 (Third Circuit, 1982)
United States v. David B. Wilber
696 F.2d 79 (Eighth Circuit, 1982)
Beaver v. Commissioner
55 T.C. 85 (U.S. Tax Court, 1970)
Hebrank v. Commissioner
81 T.C. No. 36 (U.S. Tax Court, 1983)
Castillo v. Commissioner
84 T.C. No. 31 (U.S. Tax Court, 1985)
Kotmair v. Commissioner
86 T.C. No. 73 (U.S. Tax Court, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1987 T.C. Memo. 439, 54 T.C.M. 380, 1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 436, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilber-v-commissioner-tax-1987.