It’s been six (count ’em, six) years since I broke the rule I learned so long ago: “If it moves, salute it; if it doesn’t, paint it; and never volunteer.” See my blogpost “I Volunteer,” 4/6/16. But I feel moved to try again.
CSTJ Lewis (“That Spelling Needs No Correction”) Carluzzo gives appropriately short shrift to Andrea J. Darnell, Docket No. 16752-21S, filed 7/26/22, an off-the-bencher. Andrea’s been here before; see my blogpost “Frivol, But Admit the Truth,” 11/13/20.
And Andrea pulls the same move: files late, claims no income when she had income, admits she got the money but claims it isn’t taxable. IRS wants a Section 6673 chop (this is Andrea’s third trip to Tax Court), but IRS’ fold on a chop at the trial looks like a typo to me.
“Respondent now concedes the section 6663(a) penalty.” Transcript, at p. 4.
Where’s the fraud? Fraudulent nonfiling (Section 6651(f)) wasn’t mentioned, and Andrea was only ten (count ’em, ten) days late with her return.
Or maybe IRS folded the Section 6662(a) accuracy chop.
“Petitioner’s position in this proceeding is most certainly frivolous, and this is not the first case that she initiated in this Court in which she advanced a frivolous position. Nevertheless, respondent’s concession of the section 6662(a) penalty constrains us to deny so much of respondent’s motion that requests the imposition of a section 6673 penalty. After all, petitioner’s … Federal income liability would have been greater if she had not initiated this proceeding.” Transcript, at pp. 6-7.
In either case, somebody needs to proofread these transcripts. I volunteer, again. For free, again.
And IRS needs to reconsider its trial folds. I can help there, too.
You must be logged in to post a comment.