I’ve often discoursed here concerning the imposition of the Section 6673 frivolity or delay-of-the-game chop. There’s a great divergence on the Tax Court bench as to when and how much to mulct the frivolite/delayer. It seems the consensus is to give a warning before slugging.

But when to warn? From the bench at argument or on trial, in an order, or in the opinion denying the frivolous/delaying maneuver?

Once again, lest I be misunderstood, I firmly believe that trial court judges need the very broadest latitude to control proceedings in their courtrooms, whether personal or digital. No administrative judge or appellate panel can hear a sneer or see a tear, and videotape replays belong in the arena, not the courtroom.

Judge Travis A. (“Tag”) Greaves has a gambit that is worth playing in Todd O. Olson, Docket No. 28000-22L, filed 6/12/24.

Denying Todd’s motion to dismiss, and apparently ignoring IRS’ subsequent motion to dismiss, Judge Tag Greaves throws this case into the general docket.

But on the way out the door, Judge Tag Greaves delivers the following: “Petitioner is warned that any future submissions or statements advancing a frivolous or groundless position may result in the imposition of a penalty under section 6673 in an amount up to $25,000.” Order, at p. 1.

Any successor jurist will, I trust, take notice that the warning has been given, and keep it handy. Just in case. And use this method elsewhere, if required.