Wendell C. Robinson & May T. Jung-Robinson, Docket No. 6446-19L, filed 4/11/22, are back, following the off-the-bencher Judge David Gustafson gave them back in January, for which see my blogpost “Don’t Debate, Abate,” 1/10/22.

But Wendell & May still want to debate, so Judge Gustafson shuts them down.

“Neither the ‘computation’ nor the memorandum submitted by the Robinsons contains a computation of their ultimate liability as determined by our bench opinion. Instead, the Robinsons explicitly attempt what Rule 155(c) flatly forbids: They ‘seek modification and reversal of the Court’s decision, based on Petitioner’s [sic] belief that the Court’s decision is based on a mistake of fact and law’. The Robinsons attach various exhibits (all of which were previously admitted into evidence) to support their argument that the Court should adopt the calculations in their original …. return.” Order, at p. 5.

Rule 155s are strictly beancounts, not reargument, reconsideration, or renewal. If you’re at a Rule 155, it’s only the numbers.

But IRS’ numbers are wonky.

“Our opinion… held that the Robinsons are liable for the section 6651(a)(2) addition to tax on $35,637 (the amount of unpaid tax liability reported by the Robinsons…), and we are unable to determine why the Commissioner calculated the section 6651(a)(2) addition to tax using $40,794.31 instead of $35,637. We will order him to show cause why this should not be corrected.” Order, at p. 6.

Takeaway- Don’t treat Rule 155s as routine. Drill down on the opinion that sends you to the Rule 155. Don’t expect the Court to rubberstamp your numbers. Doublecheck IRS’ numbers.

Don’t debate, calculate and recalculate.