I often wondered why petitioners paid up in full, rather than paying a deposit per Rev. Proc. 2015-18. Perhaps the ambiguity in Rev. Proc. 2015-18, Section 4.05, subdivisions (1) and (2), raises a concern that the issue that a post-petition but pre-motion or pre-trial deposit will not serve to stay Section 7485 collection.

Alternatively, making the deposit will stop accrual of interest in any case. And we’ve seen any number of cases where the inevitable delay in Tax Court litigation causes interest to exceed deficiency, with Section 6404(h) relief a mere Band-aid for an amputation.

But keeping the case alive by cutting off interest entails a further risk: IRS can assert an increased deficiency by way of amending the answer, if they deem that they can sustain BoP on the excess. Payment in full after a SNOD, barring fraud, eliminates that possibility.

I thought Ch J Maurice B (“Mighty Mo”) Foley had cured himself of the pathetic fallacy, calling a person a “power of attorney.” “Unadmitted representative” is correct, per Form 2848, Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative. The Power of Attorney itself is either a piece of paper or a concatenation of electrons, unless the Form be tattooed on the person, like Sir A. P. Herbert’s check for payment of tax written on a cow.

But he’s back at it in Lauris C. Campbell, Docket No. 1770-21, filed 7/7/21, wherein he states that the petition “…had been signed only by petitioner’s daughter and power of attorney, Desrene Freeman.” Order, at p.1.

Desrene gets next friended, based upon “…documentation establishing petitioner’s medical condition and resultant incompetence independently to pursue this case.” Order, at p.1.

Might be nice to have a list of the documentation (without particulars, of course) to guide other self-representeds in similar circumstances.