No, not politics; this is a non-partisan blog. But the system is broken.

We have some of the best, most-qualified judges on the United States Tax Court. See my recent blogposts “Acceuillons, Let’s Welcome, Judge Albert B. Lauber”, 2/5/13, and “An Open Buch”, 1/16/13, and look at the resumes of those two judges. Of course, not to slight their colleagues, read all their curricula vitae (or Lives and Miracles). Tons of talent on the Tax Court bench. If I could form a firm with even two such as partners, I’d retire and let someone else write these blogs.

But at the Bar? Tax Court doesn’t appoint counsel, and there is no panel; see my blogpost “With Friends Like Him”, 2/26/13, where a desperately out-of-his-depth “best friend” begs for help but doesn’t get it. And most automatic Tax Court admittees, lawyers who managed to cop a license in any USA jurisdiction, don’t have a clue. See my blogpost “Throwing the Buch”, 3/5/13, where Judge Buch, a Judge with a resume replete with extraordinary accomplishments, must admonish a Harvard-graduate partner in a law firm about ethical responsibilities toward a client.

And the sad stories just keep on coming. No opinions today, post-Snowquester, and no designated hitters, so here’s a simple order that shows what’s wrong, Matthew James Murnane, Docket No. 27548-12S, filed 3/7/13, a small-claimer (like a $15K maiden-claimer ninth race at a nothing track, when all the players have gone home).

Matt is a year and a half late with one petition, and five months late with another, so Chief Judge Thornton has to toss three tax years’ worth of Mike’s gripes. That’s par for the course in a Court of limited statutory jurisdiction.

The sad story comes in when IRS mailed a SNOD to an address not the taxpayer’s last known address. Chief Judge Thornton: “…the record demonstrates that the notice of deficiency, dated August 25, 2008, was sent not to petitioner’s last known and current address in Ballston Spa, New York, but to an address in Saratoga Springs, New York. Respondent represents that the notice was returned unclaimed. Petitioner confirms in his objection that the notice ‘was returned as unclaimed August 25, 2008’ and goes on to state that ‘the notice of deficiency was not sent to the correct address there by [sic] making the notice of deficiency invalid’. However, petitioner nonetheless takes the position in his objection that ‘I need small court to make a dission [sic] on my signature and the amount adjustment on 2006 tax form’.” Order, p.2

Matt doesn’t get his “dission”, because an improperly-mailed SNOD is no SNOD, and no SNOD, no Tax Court case, even though the illustrious, supremely-credential judges hereinabove referred to might object to being called a “small court”.

Yet Tax Court is the “small court”. It’s a $60 ticket to justice for people who can’t afford a trip to USDC or USCFC in the company of lawyers who just might make the cut for the Tax Court bench. You can best believe such lawyers bill at an hourly rate much above the purse or wallet of such taxpayers as Matt.

Tax Court is the only nationwide tax tribunal even though, like USDC, it must follow its superior CCA. Tax Court has the expertise USDC and CCA judges can’t have, by virtue of the variety and multifarious nature of the cases with which the Big Benches must deal.

But the practice of Tax Court is hypertechnical. Even where Tax Court Judges wish they could help, they can’t.

Matt gets tossed from the “small court” with no “dission” in his case, which is as important to him, I’ll wager, as to a Fortune 50 multinational whose case is one where the amounts are rounded to the nearest million.

This isn’t right.