When it comes to dubious arguments about paperwork, shady stories about motivation, and hard-to-believe, soft-serve testimony, the stuff coming out of the ultra-top-secret Australian outback Pine Ridge stakeout is equal to, or better than, any Dixieland Boondockery. Take a wee decko at Robert Y. Diaz and Brittany L. Diaz, T. C. Memo. 2024-43, filed 4/16/24.

Judge Albert G. (“Scholar Al”) Lauber, whatever his other undeniable accomplishments, admits that “(N)either party called a handwriting expert as a witness, and this Court professes no expertise on the subject.” T. C. Memo. 2024-43, at p. 11. Nevertheless and notwithstanding the foregoing, Judge Scholar Al finds Robert, s/a/k/a “‘Rob,’ ‘Rbt,’ or ‘R.’”, T. C. Memo. 2024-43, at p. 12, did in fact sign the Section 7122 closing agreement with IRS; he would be taxed as a US citizen, not as an Australian. Turns out Australian taxes are higher.

But Rob, Rbt., or R claims his signature was forged, by whom he saith not. So his trial is bifurcated, while we await the outcome of the appeal in Cory Smith, before finishing this case.

Judge Scholar Al, goes through the bushelbasketful of paperwork Rob, Rbt or R denies signing, wondering why Rob, Rbt or R chose higher Australian taxes (which he never paid), and properly filed two (count ’em, two) years’ worth of 1040 MFJs not claiming Foreign Earned Income Exclusion, and then amended to claim FEIE.

Perhaps, as usual, the answer is in a footnote. And maybe so might could be this explains the entire Australian Outbackery.

” A 19-page post-trial brief was submitted on petitioners’ behalf. It is devoted largely to technical questions about tax treaties, Australian law, and other matters irrelevant to the signature authenticity issue. Petitioners admitted at trial that they were ‘working with’ a lawyer named John Castro. Mr. Castro did not enter an appearance in this case; he is not admitted to practice in this Court (or apparently in any other court); and he was recently indicted for tax crimes. See Press Release, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Mansfield Man Charged in Fraudulent Tax Return Scam (Jan. 10, 2024), https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndtx/pr/mansfield-man-charged-fraudulent-tax-return-scam. The Court believes that petitioners’ post-trial brief was likely ghost-written by Mr. Castro or someone associated with him. That brief devotes less than a page to discussion of the signature authenticity issue. On that page it asserts that “the Closing Agreement contained a witness signature section” and finds it suspicious that Mr. Christensen did not sign the Closing Agreement as a witness to petitioners’ signatures. But the Closing Agreement does not have “a witness signature section”; the Closing Agreement has signature lines only for the taxpayers, their representative (if any), and the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Witness signature sections were contained in the other three documents Mr. Diaz signed on August 13, 2015—the Declaration, the Employee Purchase Agreement, and the Payroll Deduction Authorization. Mr. Christensen duly signed each of those documents as a witness and/or approving officer for Raytheon.” T. C. Memo. 2024-43, at pp. 12-13, footnote 1.

And note petitioners’ prior counsel (who is apparently admitted to USTC) bailed pre-trial, “…indicating that she had represented them ‘pursuant to a third-party payor agreement that is no longer in existence.’ We granted that Motion and petitioners thereafter proceeded pro sese.” T. C. Memo. 2024-43, at p. 6.