But Steve, the evil gubmint always prevails in Tax Court!

[Anti-861]

Except when it doesn't like it didn't here...

TIMOTHY P. SZULCZEWSKI,
Petitioner
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
Respondent

UNITED STATES TAX COURT

Timothy P. Szulczewski, pro se.

Laura L. Buckley, for respondent.

GOLDBERG, Special Trial Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of section 7463 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect at the time the petition was filed. Pursuant to section 7463(b), the decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion shall not be treated as precedent for any other case. Unless otherwise indicated, subsequent section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The issue for decision is whether respondent abused his discretion in sustaining the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien for collection of petitioner's unpaid 2002 tax liability.

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. Petitioner resided at Birch Hill Drive in California when he filed his petition.

[...]

Therefore, weighing the totality of the evidence in the record we find that respondent has failed to meet his burden of proving that he properly mailed a notice of deficiency to petitioner at petitioner's last known address using certified or registered mail. Consequently the assessment here is invalid and respondent is prohibited from conducting collection activity. It follows that we are unable to sustain respondent's determination to proceed with collection by the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien. Because the assessment is invalid, we need not address any other of the parties' contentions.

To reflect our disposition of the issue,

Decision will be entered for petitioner.

But wait, the judge is in the pocket of the USG and therefore always rules for the government. How can this be? Who is this renegade activist judge?

[Noah]

Amazing what the Courts will do when one gives them something to work with.

[SteveSy]

I never said they "always" prevail. However, there is more than enough cases to show the government has the upper hand by far. The government has the presumption of validity in almost every single case. They assert you made money YOU must prove you didn't, not the other way around. They assert the assessment was valid, you must, almost impossibly, prove it wasn't. The score looks something like this People 1, Government 1,000+ and counting.

btw, it would be nice if you quoted the entire case. I'll bet it will show how egregious the government acted.

[Joey Smith]

I never said they "always" prevail

But you have in the past said that the judges are in on a massive conspiracy to rule in favor of the government.

[Famspear]

I never said they "always" prevail. However, there is more than enough cases to show the government has the upper hand by far. The government has the presumption of validity in almost every single case. They assert you made money YOU must prove you didn't, not the other way around. They assert the assessment was valid, you must, almost impossibly, prove it wasn't. The score looks something like this People 1, Government 1,000+ and counting.

btw, it would be nice if you quoted the entire case. I'll bet it will show how egregious the government acted.

If you're in Tax Court then, generally no "assessment" has yet been made -- the purpose of Tax Court is to allow the taxpayer a chance to have a court consider whether the Commissioner's "determination" (not "assessment") is correct.

But your basic point is valid. The burden of proof is on the taxpayer.

On the other hand, the taxpayer is the one suing the Commissioner, not the other way around. The general rule in American law is that the burden of proof is on the plaintiff (petitioner in Tax Court), not on the defendant (or respondent in Tax Court).

Still, again, I think your basic complaint is well taken, Steve.

I would, however, disagree somewhat with the characterization that it's "almost impossible" for the taxpayer to prove his or her contentions. Uphill battle, yes. "Almost impossible" may be overstating the slope of the hill.

Where the government's case (on either factual or legal issues) is not the strongest, the case may get settled with the taxpayer by the Appeals Division within the Internal Revenue Service. Contrary to what many tax protesters claim to "believe" about how tax practitioners feel about the IRS, many tax practitioners understand that IRS personnel are people just like everyone else, and that both practitioners and IRS personnel can make errors, misjudgments, genuine, reasonable differences, etc., in the examination process -- which can lead to settlement of cases before a judgment can ever be rendered by the Tax Court. This kind of factor may tend to skew the statistics on "IRS wins" in Tax Court even more in favor of the IRS.

[Nikki]

Every year, something in the range of tens of thousands of petitions are filed with the Tax Court.

However, each year, the Court only actually hears a few thousand cases.

Why is that?

Before a case actually reaches the Court for arguments and decision, there are several points where either party can concede the issues.

For example, if someone failed to file, they will receive a notice of deficiency.
They can then file the missing return and only have to pay a few penalties plus interest. Most of those cases go away.

Most cases are routed to Appeals for processing before they proceed to the Court. Appeals disposes of a huge number of cases by reaching compromises or by educating the petitioner as to how their complaint is incorrect.

An additional amount of cases are dismissed for failure of the petitioner to show up at court, because the petitioner filed after the deadline, because the IRS makes significant concessions ahead of time which the petitioner accepts.

Of the cases which finally go to Court, there are three possible outcomes: the Commisioner wins 100%, the petitioner wins 100%, or the Court splits the decision.

Beyond that, anyone is welcome to review each day's opinions as posted on the Tax Court's web site.

[ASITStands]

If you're in Tax Court then, generally no "assessment" has yet been made --

Dude! Reading comprehension.

TIMOTHY P. SZULCZEWSKI,
Petitioner
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
Respondent

UNITED STATES TAX COURT

Timothy P. Szulczewski, pro se.

Laura L. Buckley, for respondent.

GOLDBERG, Special Trial Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of section 7463 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect at the time the petition was filed. Pursuant to section 7463(b), the decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion shall not be treated as precedent for any other case. Unless otherwise indicated, subsequent section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The issue for decision is whether respondent abused his discretion in sustaining the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien for collection of petitioner's unpaid 2002 tax liability.

(Emphasis added.)

I would, however, disagree somewhat with the characterization that it's "almost impossible" for the taxpayer to prove his or her contentions. Uphill battle, yes. "Almost impossible" may be overstating the slope of the hill.

Haven't been to tax court lately, have we? Lots and lots of tax protesters.

Well, at least, lots and lots of Petitioners making tax protester arguments. That's always going to be uphill. The cases that have legitimate issues are usually rescheduled for later in the week, so I can understand why it would appear that tax court is biased toward the IRS.

I doubt that many People actually hear the cases that have legitimate issues. I've met some of the attorneys representing estates and corporations, and I've seen the document and evidence folders they carry. I've spoken with them, but I've never watched them in court.

Anyway, tax court has upwards of 30,000 petitions filed each year. I'm sure there's a mix of tax protester and legitimate tax cases, but it's probably a ratio of 70-30. Just a guess.

The ratio of deficiency cases to collection due process cases would be another measure. Most Petitioners are not going to win a collection due process case precisely because the underlying liability is not at issue but rather the abuse or lack thereof of the Appeals Officer.

[Nikki]

Illegal tax protest petitions are well below 10% of the Court's case load.

However, they figure strongly in the number of published court opinions because they never get resolved prior to (or even during) trial.

Why should the TP settle or change his stance? After all, he's right, isn't he?

As a matter of fact, the higher up the chain of courts you go, the greater the ration of TP to rational cases becomes.

[ASITStands]

Illegal tax protest petitions are well below 10% of the Court's case load.

Really? I'd have thought much, much more from the times I've attended Calendar Call.

As a matter of fact, the higher up the chain of courts you go, the greater the ration of TP to rational cases becomes.

And, how does the ratio become greater if the tax protesting petitions are well below 10%?

[Thule]

And, how does the ratio become greater if the tax protesting petitions are well below 10%?

Because TPs refuse to quit.

[Nikki]

Illegal tax protest petitions are well below 10% of the Court's case load.

Really? I'd have thought much, much more from the times I've attended Calendar Call.

As a matter of fact, the higher up the chain of courts you go, the greater the ration of TP to rational cases becomes.

And, how does the ratio become greater if the tax protesting petitions are well below 10%?

As I said, most legitimate cases are either resolved or closed long before the court session.

As Thule said, the TPs refuse to give up, so their cases don't go away until the Supreme Court denies cert. Even then, they come back, year after year, contesting notices of deficiency, adverse CDP hearing determinations, lien filings, and levies, and other collection actions.

Just think of the Energizer bunny.

[ASITStands]

And, how does the ratio become greater if the tax protesting petitions are well below 10%?

Because TPs refuse to quit.

And, you're saying, "Litigants with legitimate issues are more prone to quit?"

Or, are you suggesting that litigants with legitimate issues settle in the lower courts?

I rather doubt that. Anyone with a legitimate issue (and for that matter, anyone who "thinks" they have a legitimate issue) is more prone to appeal any adverse decision in lower court.

I don't see how less than 10% tax protesting petitions in tax court translates into a higher ratio on appeal. I think it's a much higher rate. Again, judging from the litigants I've seen in calendar calls across the nation, there's a higher percentage of tax protesters.

I do wish the tax court would publish those kind of numbers.

[Pantherphil]

My personal experience in filing Tax Court petitions for clients with "legitimate" issues is that they get resolved promptly, frequently through referral back to the IRS appeals process without even involving U.S. trial counsel. Most of the cases that I have brought have involved "failure to file" cases where the IRS has issued an assessment. These cases are generally not "tax protest" cases but involve folks who were unaware of their filing obligations (primarily immigrants) or "under the table" workers who get tripped up by 1099 matches or folks who have fallen on hard times (mental illness, drug abuse, alcohol abuse). Many involve financial hardship and inability to pay. IRS Appeals office has been very helpful in resolving these cases without need of involving Tax Court counsel. And in the rare cases where Appeals could not resolve the issues, trial counsel have generally been very interested in negotiating reasonable settlements of legitimate issues or in presenting legitimate issues to the Court through stipulated facts and legal argument.

I would certainly not be surprised that tax protesters who wish to fight non-meritorious issues to the bitter end wind up being a disproportionate number of the cases actually tried and an even more disproportionate number of the cases actually appealed to the Courts of Appeals.

[Famspear]

If you're in Tax Court then, generally no "assessment" has yet been made --

Dude! Reading comprehension.

Dude! Reading comprehension yourself.

Read it again:

If you're in Tax Court then, generally no "assessment" has yet been made --

The point of using the word "generally" is to denote that there are exceptions to the general rule.

Reading is fundamental.

[ASITStands]

Read it again:

If you're in Tax Court then, generally no "assessment" has yet been made --

The point of using the word "generally" is to denote that there are exceptions to the general rule.

Reading is fundamental.

Here we are again. "generally" would "usually" denote a majority of the cases, and I'd think the cases are more "generally" divided half deficiency and half collection due process.

It's customary when responding to a particular case to refer to the case, and that's why I poked you about reading comprehension, as the case was clearly an issue with a lien notice.

Of course, you'll say that you were not responding to a particular case but to 'SteveSy.'

And, I'll be "as big about it" as 'Noah' was yesterday,

"I apologize for any offense on my part. You stated your starting point for your comment and I should have quietly considered what you thought."

[Nikki]

Here we are again. "generally" would "usually" denote a majority of the cases, and I'd think the cases are more "generally" divided half deficiency and half collection due process.
...

Based on what? A total wild guess?

Actually, they account for less than 5% of the Court's cases.

[ASITStands]

Here we are again. "generally" would "usually" denote a majority of the cases, and I'd think the cases are more "generally" divided half deficiency and half collection due process.
...

Based on what? A total wild guess?

Actually, they account for less than 5% of the Court's cases.

Well, you have as yet to say where you get your numbers. A source would settle the issue.

[Nikki]

The Tax Court provides analyses of their case load on request.

[Imalawman]

I'd like to add this to the debate - WHO CARES?!

[ASITStands]

I'd like to add this to the debate - WHO CARES?!

I did because I got caught in the cross-hairs of a lack of information.

I should have just stayed in bed today! Or, is it because it's Friday before a 3-day weekend?