Attorney-at-Law

TWO-ADVISOR RULE – PART DEUX

In Uncategorized on 10/09/2018 at 20:04

With neither opinion nor designated hitter today, I turn to an oldie-but-goody, the two-advisor rule. For backstory, see my blogpost thus entitled, 6/23/16.

Again I acknowledge the advisor, whose name I have forgotten, from whom I stole this mantra: “Every taxpayer needs two advisors: one to tell her what the law is, and the other to tell her what she wishes the law was. Then she can choose whose advice to follow.”

Today we have Jessie Daniel McDonald, Docket No. 24295-16, filed 10/9/18. No advisor is stated for Jessie, but her case sounds like one of the kind exemplified by the aforesaid.

Judge Albert G (“Scholar Al”) Lauber states Jessie’s case simply.

“The sole issue in this case is whether petitioner had unreported Social Security income…. After the IRS issued the notice of deficiency, petitioner filed an amended return…admitting receipt of taxable Social Security benefits. On the amended return she reported taxable Social Security benefits of $8,764 and additional tax owed of $1,313.” Order, at p. 1.

When IRS moved to toss Jessie for want of prosecution, and Judge Scholar Al ordered Jessie to respond, she responded thus: “… petitioner submitted a letter that we filed as Petitioner’s Response to Order…. She offered no explanation as to why she failed to appear for trial…. She asserts that she objects to the entering of a decision because she is over the age of 70 and thus ‘exempt’ from taxation of Social Security income.” Order, at p.1.

I caution my readers against relying on Jessie’s litigating position, however much I wish it were the law. Being on the downslope of the age of 70, it would brighten my declining years.

Judge Scholar Al, however, is not buying.

“There is no legal basis for petitioner’s assertion that her age entitles her to an exemption from taxation of Social Security income. See I.R.C.§§61(a),86(a). She admitted that she received taxable Social Security income by filing an amended return reporting it. And she admitted that she had a deficiency of $1,313… by showing on her amended return additional tax due in that amount.” Order, at p. 2.

He enters decision (minus chops) for IRS.

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: