Just when you thought the Dixieland Boondockers were in the lead with cookiecutter cases of dubious merit, here’s Australia coming up on the outside. Judge David Gustafson has “about twenty similar cases involving issues related to the effect of closing agreements on the availability of the foreign earned income exclusion for income earned in Australia,” on the radar as he considers Alejandro Nunez & Amy Nunez, Docket No. 6500-20, filed 3/19/24, at p. 1.

Apparently the leader of the pack is Cory H. Smith, who figured in my blogpost “Unclosed?” 8/25/22. Check it out.

Anyway, Cory is in a hold at DC Cir, and Judge David Gustafson is in no immoderate haste to deal with Al’s & Amy’s cookiecutter summary J motion. IRS and Al & Amy want to go on briefing, but DC Cir, a great fan of going early to the bullpen (cf. Mandy Mobley Li), had an amicus come in to deal with the Section 7121 closeouts The amicus said DC Cir should affirm Tax Court.

Whereupon IRS broke out the ice bucket and the Veuve Cliquot, but Cory filed a brief in opposition.

Al & Amy claim residence in Australia at material time, so any appeal goes to DC Cir, per Section 7482(b)(1) (flush language).

“Although both parties suggest that we should proceed with briefing this case, any appeal from this case would be to the D.C. Circuit, in which Smith remains pending.” Order, at p. 2.

In the interest of judicial economy, therefore, keep filing status reports, guys.

Translated from judgespeak, this means “Give me a break, guys, I don’t need drafting exercises, you admit there are no factual issues here so the law is whatever DC Cir says (or whatever their outside expert says) it is. Wake me up when they’ve told you.”

Twenty (count ’em, twenty) cases from the original Outback? Advance, Australia fair!