Tax Court will not assist a taxpayer in preparing his return. One might have mistakenly come to that conclusion by reading STJ Lew (Spell It Right) Carluzzo’s opinion in Loretta Lea Wanat, T. C. Sum. Op. 2012-92, filed 9/17/12, or my blogpost “Tax Court As Preparer?”, 9/17/12.

But Judge Morrison isn’t having any in Diep N. Hoang, 2013 T. C. Memo. 127, filed 5/15/13.

Diep claims he thought he was an accrual-basis taxpayer when he filed his first petition for tax year 2001, and Judge Vasquez disabused him of that notion.

So when he filed his next petition (late) for the “deficiency of $5,188,587 in federal income tax for 2006, a section 6651(a)(1) addition to tax of $1,297,533.50, and a penalty under section 6662(a) of $1,037,717.40.” 2013 T. C. Memo. 127, at pp. 1-2, he thought that Tax Court would tell him how to do it right.

Not quite, Diep. Diep tried to get into evidence some obviously altered brokerage statements and an explanation why he filed late, but Judge Morrison barred that.

And when Diep tried to avoid the Section 6662(a) penalties, Judge Morrison relegated Diep’s argument to a footnote: “According to the explanation (and to another document fragment and court papers), the Tax Court failed to assist Hoang in preparing his tax returns after the 2001 deficiency case was decided and, as a result, Hoang no longer had to file federal income tax returns. The Tax Court is not required to assist taxpayers in preparing their tax returns; taxpayers who do not receive such assistance are not absolved of their obligation to file federal tax returns. It would have been unreasonable for Hoang to believe that he had been absolved of his filing obligations. Such a belief would not constitute reasonable cause for failing to timely file his tax return.” 2013 T. C. Memo. 127, at p. 32, footnote 45.

Diep, next time you need to file a tax return, try a good tax professional; just not one in a black robe.