Whether Maimonides or Schumacher is your guide, neither addresses the problem that has been occupying far too much of the US Tax Court’s Chief Judges’ time. And mine.

I refer, of course, to the non-admitteds attempting to represent petitioners in Tax Court, because they are welcome at Exam. Having a Form 2848 or a CAF number is not enough. I will not weary my readers’ patience with yet another citation to an Order embodying the mantra “The United States Tax Court, which is separate and independent from the Internal Revenue Service, has certain requirements that must be met before an individual can be recognized as representing petitioner before the Court. The Tax Court, unlike the Internal Revenue Service, does not recognize power of attorneys.”

Almost every working day, at least a couple Orders (hi, Judge Holmes) with this language are needed to toss the non-admitted.  Leaving aside the ungrammatical “power of attorneys,” why this language does not appear in the Guide for Petitioners, Form 2 instructions, or anywhere else on the Tax Court website, eludes me.

Does the Chief Judge require busywork?