How often have I heard that phrase delivered in lugubrious tones, to lament the unworthy expenditure of the aforementioned on the dubious (not to say frivolous) claims of an ignorant or piratical litigant, be the litigant plaintiff or defendant.

Now I don’t wish anyone to suppose I abate one jot of respect for the distinguished schoolmate of my colleague Peter Reilly, CPA, Judge Albert G. (“Scholar Al”) Lauber. Mr. Reilly’s account of Judge Scholar Al’s exalted rank at the old schoolhouse was almost as impressive as Judge Scholar Al’s resumé.

But Judge, was it really necessary to expend eighteen (count ’em, eighteen) pages of your pellucid prose on Lawrence James Saccato, T. C. Memo. 2023-96, filed 7/25/23? Larry ran a miniwarehouse operation through a bunch of entities and trusts without any beneficiary but himself, hiding the money and not filing. As usual, he had a bunch bank accounts (hi,  Judge Holmes) and a girlfriend and a dodger-specializing sidekick to help him run the various stashes.

Of course Larry has no records, just lots of self-serving testimony, like he’s trustee of trusts and doesn’t know who the beneficiaries are. So bank deposits are the spécialité du jour, and they serve Larry up on toast. The deficiencies (four years’ worth, plus chops) rain down.

IRS does concede $44K of COD for which they haven’t evidence, but they win all the rest.

But Judge Scholar Al does recognize what a waste this all has been.

“Although petitioner maintains that ‘[he] is not a tax protestor,’ his filings in this Court belie that contention. His persistent filing of frivolous papers has wasted the Government’s time and ours. We will accordingly require that he pay to the United States a penalty of $10,000.” T. C. Memo. 2023-96, at p. 18.

Footnote to the foregoing: Reynold Harvey, T. C. Memo. 2023-95, filed 7/25/23 must be a kindred spirit to Larry, although they reside a continent apart. Rey resides in my old stamping grounds and boyhood home, The Bronx.

And Rey claims he’s gonna take his argument “all the way to the Supreme Court,” T. C. 2023-95, at p. 8. Apparently because he wasted fewer scarce judicial resources than Larry, Rey gets only a $1K Section 6673 frivolity chop.

Judge Scholar Al apparently collects ’em. “The assertion that wages are not income is a time-worn tax-protester argument. Variations on this theme have been compiled by the IRS in The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments, a compendium of frivolous positions and the caselaw refuting them. See Internal Revenue Serv., The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments 9–13 (Mar. 2022), https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/2022-the-truth-about-frivolous-tax-arguments.pdf. In plain English, this document characterizes as frivolous the arguments that ‘wages . . . and other compensation received for personal services are not income’ and that ‘there is no taxable gain when a person ‘exchanges’ labor for money.” See id. at 10. Although petitioner is not a lawyer, had he made even a modest inquiry using an internet search engine he would have found the copious authorities refuting his stance.” T. C. Memo. 2023-95, at pp. 7-8.

Rey did get a warning, but went ahead, with his eye on the Supremes.

I make the morning line 6 to 5 that Rey doesn’t get to the Supreme Court.