Thomas Jefferson’s preamble to the Declaration of Independence is my text for this sermonette. I am reviewing two Tax Court orders, and I really wish STJ Daniel A. (“Yuda”) Guy in Albert Herrera, Jr., Docket No. 12662-16S, filed 4/28/17, and Judge Chiechi in Peter Chafee Card, Jr., Docket No. 3607-16, of even date therewith (as my high-priced colleagues would say) had given us the rationale behind their respective orders.

STJ Yuda simply bounces IRS’ motion to conform pleadings to the proof, with no explanation except to refer to the transcript of the Bench Opinion. But the Bench Opinion is not to be found, otherwise, I suppose, than by climbing on Bolt Bus, hitting The City L’Enfant Built, hiking from 10th Street NW, to the Glasshouse at 400 Second St, NW, and invoking Section 7461.

It might be well to publish the transcript, even if it can’t be quoted, to give us some hints of how such a motion might succeed.

Then Judge Chichi lists a long series of orders, in all whereof she adjures PCC to eschew frivolity in demands and in arguments. At the end of this catalogue, she nails PCC for $14K in GST and add-ons.

Judge Chiechi then unloads a $10K Section 6673 frivolity chop on PCC.

As far as I can tell, this is PCC’s first venture to Tax Court. But the deficiency comes out of the Generation-Skipping Tax, a rare bird in Tax Court litigation. And given that GST doesn’t kick in below $5 million, a $10K deficiency plus $4K in add-ons can’t be a lot of money.

Was the only issue PCC’s repeated frivolity?

I don’t expect “somber reasoning and copious citation of precedent,” but a little guidance never hurt.