It’s the best, and probably the most quoted, aphorism of Dr. Samuel Johnson. “Depend upon it, sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.”

Judge Courtney D. (“CD”) Jones echoes Dr. Sam’s observation, as she takes ZMZ Global, Inc., Docket No. 15380-22, filed 8/21/26, off the 180-day status report track, where it’s been since Valentine’s Day a year ago.

The latest billet doux from ZMZ announces they and IRS reached a basis for settlement in May, are working on a stiped decision, and hope to file same “shortly.” Order, at p. 1.

Judges love settlements, and Judge CD Jones is no exception.

“The Court appreciates petitioner’s report and is encouraged by the parties’ apparent progress toward resolution of this case.” Order, at p. 1.

Except.

“Petitioner requests that the Court retain jurisdiction and require status reports every 180 days if the decision document is not filed.” Idem.

Do I hear a waltz? More to the point, maybe so might could be Judge CD Jones hears a waltz.

“…the Court concludes that continuation of the 180-day status report track is not warranted under the circumstances; specifically, petitioner represents that a decision document is expected to be filed shortly. Accordingly, the Court will remove this case from the 180-day status report track and direct the parties to file either a proposed stipulated decision or a further report within 60 days.” Order, at p. 1.

Brian J. Laborde, T. C. Memo. 2026-74, filed 8/20/26, had three (count ’em, three) mailing addresses during the four (count ’em, four) years this case concerns. IRS hit Brian with a couple TFRP Letters 1153 for those years, and Brian doesn’t contest those. Nor does he contest the NFTL that followed.

He does contest the NITLs, saying those weren’t sent to his last known address. And the AO at Appeals who gave the Section 6330(c)(1) verification that all procedures were followed was a trifle conclusory, never stating how reached the conclusion that NITLs were mailed to last known address.

As we all know, that’s not waivable, even if not raised by Brian’s trusty rep on paper (or electrons) or at the CDP. Statute says Appeals shall verify.

Judge Adam B. (“Sport”) Landy traces Brian’s peripatetic wanderings all over The Big Easy, seeing where he says he lived and when and what he put on his tax returns and any other clear and concise notifications he gave IRS.

But the AO did none thereof, so this case gets remand for Determination Number Four.

Takeaway- Practitioner, add to your Form 12153 and your petition boilerplate failure to comply with Section 6330(c)(1) verification.

He’s only been twice on this my blog heretofore, so I must apologize to Percy Squire, T. C. Memo. 2026-71, filed 8/19/26; btw, his firm, Percy Squire Co LLC, T. C. Memo. 2026-72, of even date herewith, shares the attention of Judge Tamara Ashford. Seems Percy and Co have a fifteen (count ’em, fifteen) year record in USTC, and Judge Ashford has ’em all. T. C. Memo. 2026-71, at p. 2, footnote 2. 

Turns out one of Percy’s cases I did blog eventually netted him a $5K Section 6673 frivolity chop, though I didn’t blog that outcome. See my blogpost “Tales of Suspense,” 1/3/20.

Percy is a wee bit casual about filing and paying his own income tax, and his firm’s FICA/FUTA/ITW. 

This time Percy stashed assets in an irrevocable trust, which ran his businesses and was behind on tax payments, soi his OIC was suspended until they caught up.

“We agree with respondent that petitioner has instituted these proceedings primarily for delay and has taken positions that are frivolous or groundless. As previously noted, see supra note 2, petitioner is no stranger to this Court; his Petition here is the seventh petition he has filed with the Court in the last approximately 15 years. In several of these prior actions (all of which are lien and/or levy actions) he has been warned not to file an offer-in-compromise solely to delay collection and that for an offer-in-compromise to be granted he must be current in his estimated tax payments. In one such prior case, he was sanctioned $5,000 pursuant to section 6673. Furthermore, in the instant proceedings petitioner has continued to press arguments that are irrelevant and to rely on documents that are not part of the stipulated record.

“The Court’s prior warnings and sanction appear to have left petitioner undeterred, despite his being an attorney admitted to practice before this Court. Accordingly, we will grant respondent’s Motion to Impose a Penalty and impose a penalty of $10,000 against petitioner pursuant to section 6673. Petitioner should realize that if in the future he continues to persist in litigation for the primary purpose of delaying the collection of his federal tax liabilities (on either his own behalf or Percy Squire Co.’s), then he will be communicating to the Court that a $10,000 penalty is insufficient to affect his behavior and that the Court should instead consider imposing a much larger penalty, up to the maximum of $25,000.” T. C. Memo. 2026-71, at p. 12. (Citation and footnote omitted).

Btw, Percy says ” I was unjustly suspended from the practice of law from 2011 through 2015.” T. C. 2026-71, at p. 4. This was in OH, before he was admitted to USTC. I’ll let you judge on that.

That phrase is “Stipulate, Don’t Capitulate”‘s little brother.  It means whatever document is thus referred to is included in whatever document you’re reading. And if you never got the document thus incorporated, you’re still signing on to it.

For James H. Ballengee and A.C. Heyde, T. C. Memo. 2026-73, filed 8/19/26, it means they’re stuck with their concessions to the FPAA, which negated deductibility of  their partnership NOLs because the debt giving rise thereto was nonrecourse and hence giving them insufficient inside basis to permit passthrough of NOL carryforwards.

Now before you TEFRA-canny ultra-sophisticates yell as if with a single voice  “old Section 6235(a)(1) partner-level factual affected item!” and inquire why no SND, Judge Adam B. (“Sport”) Landy will tell you.

James and A. C. signed individually, and James signed as manager of their box-checked LLC, Forms 870-LT, agreeing to all IRS’ slices-and-dices for two (count ’em ,two) of the years at issue (IRS folded the third). “Form 870–LT contained only the names of the partnerships, the names of petitioners, the years at issue, and a statement in the remarks: ‘See attached 870–LT Continuation Page.’” T. C. Memo. 2026-73, at p. 4.

The 870-LT Continuation Page said: “The accompanying Form 886–A, Explanation of Partnership Items and Partnership-Level Adjustments, is hereby incorporated by references.” Idem.

James and A. C. claim they never got the Form 886-A, which set forth the aforementioned slices-and-dices, and would have consulted their trusty CPAs, who handled the audit from which arose said Form 886-A, if they had. So James and A. C. claimed IRS misrepresented a material fact.

“Regardless of whether petitioners’ assertion that Form 886–A was not attached to Form 870–LT when they received and signed it is true, they have not shown that this was a deliberate or intentional attempt by the Commissioner to misrepresent any terms of the closing agreement. In addition, petitioners’ contention that there was a mutual mistake is insufficient to set aside the closing agreement because mutual mistake is not an enumerated ground for invalidating a closing agreement under section 7121(b). We determine that there is no misrepresentation of material fact and that petitioners executed a valid Form 870–LT waiver.” T. C. Memo. 2026-73, at p.13.

Form 870-LT is a complete waiver and closing agreement.

Now lest anyone think James and A. C. were innocents caught in an IRS squeeze play, Judge Sport Landy has some background.

“Petitioner James H. Ballengee received a bachelor of science in accounting from Louisiana State University; and although he is not currently licensed, he practiced as a certified public accountant (CPA) for five years at KPMG. After leaving KPMG, Mr. Ballengee founded and sold multiple companies in the oil and gas industry. Because of the nature of his work, Mr. Ballengee reviewed legal documents and frequently consulted with professionals, such as lawyers or CPAs, before executing said documents, as needed.” T. C. Memo. 2026-73, at p. 2.

Neither Hamlet’s immortal lament nor the protest of Andrew Tabaka, Chris Tabaka, Next Friend, T. C. Memo. 2026-70, filed 8/18/26, move Judge Albert G. (“Scholar Al”) Lauber. Chris pointed out that IRS had failed to credit the late Andrew with two (count ’em, two) payments made against the deficiency to which the late Andrew stiped out before he became the late Andrew. IRS had later corrected same, but still claimed interest from due date of return to paid in full. The case had gone to litigation prep before it settled out.

Judge Scholar Al applies ministerial and managerial, the Section 6404(e)(1) standbys, and finds IRS committed neither miscue.

“In short, the time that elapsed between April 16, 2018 (when the IRS first contacted petitioner in writing about the deficiency), and August 6, 2019 (when the Court issued the [stiped] Decision), was less than 16 months, including a trip to Appeals. Compared with the mine run of cases in this Court, petitioner’s case was resolved quite expeditiously. In any event, “[t]he mere passage of time in the litigation phase of a tax dispute does not establish error or delay” under section 6404(e).” T. C. Memo. 2026-70, at p. 6. (Citation omitted).

The only thing that took time was IRS getting information from third-party payors to substantiate the 1099-Rs at issue. Once the back-ups came in, the case settled. 

Suleiman Sami, T. C. Memo. 2026-69, filed 8/18/26, claims he is one such, but despite his two (count ’em, two) accounting degrees he cannot keep enough records to cause Judge Elizabeth A. (“Tex”) Copeland to allow a bunch deductions (hi, Judge Holmes). COGS for his ticket scalping business fail, but he does get Cohan treatment for the two (count ’em, two) passenger vehicles he runs in his unlicensed rideshare operation because he kept all the trip slips and his credit card and EZpass statements provide some basis for expenses.

As for influencing, he shows no income for years at issue, although Judge Tex Copeland shows how influencers make money (T. C. Memo. 2026-69, at pp. 4-5). Sami’s costly appearances at celebrity events, which he puts up on his social media, don’t qualify as business. Dropping a pass from Tom Brady and missing a serve from John McEnroe are just too much fun, even if you put them on your page. When he claims what he pays to attend big-ticket charity events are contributions, that founders on “no goods or services.”

Long before there were “influencers,” I missed three (count ’em, three) serves from Ray Ruffles, who won the Wimbledon mixed doubles that year; can’t say it was fun.

Sami did all his own Exam and pre-trial, but brought in The Jersey Boys and friends to try the case. Wise move.

Can you imagine a heartwarming boondockery? Neither can I, but this one comes close.

Vivian D. (“Golden”) Hoard, Esq., aided by a thoroughly competent panel of petitioners’ experts and a client whose loyalty is exemplary in a business not known for excessive decency, salvages a CA boondockery, knocking out all the chops and saving better than half the deduction, in Malibu Valley Land, LLC, Spectrum Development, Inc., Tax Matters Partner, T. C. Memo. 2026-68, filed 8/17/26.

Judger Travis A. (“Tag”) Greaves walks us through a discounted cash flow development deal in the Santa Monica Mountains, LA’s retreat for the rich and famous. This is a 40-year old VTTM, a vesting tentative tract map deal that locked in old-time zoning and development until the CA State government ousted the locals.

Our hero is Brian, who fights to keep his Dad’s dream alive, paying off his Dad’s debts and his own, eschewing bankruptcy court and all the other dodges developers and investors pull. His horseback-riding buddies also play fair. IRS’ appraisal team are less than spectacular. Judge Tag Greaves stays with the story, writes a template for pricing out a development deal, and sends the parties off to a Rule 155 beancount. Brian’s trusty CPA and his trusty attorney also come through.

Even though the Rule 155 beancount hasn’t happened, Judge Tag Greaves absolves Briasn and friends of the 40% substantial overvaluation misstatement based on his calculations, T. C. Memo. 2026-68, at p. 89.

To the Golden Hoard, a Taishoff “Good job,” all around.

This is a non-political blog, so I am not commenting on the current tariff negotiations here. Rather, I note Judge Emin (“Eminent”) Toro’s refusal to become involved in the settlement talks between IRS and Fredonia Woodcock Creek Reserve, LLC, Fredonia Woodcock Creek Reserve IP, LLC, Partnership Representative, et al., Docket No. 6346-24, filed 8/17/26.

The Fredonians ask the Court to “‘extend the deadline for accepting the settlement offers in the above cases.’ It maintains that ‘[t]he need for the extension is to reconcile the disparity between the calculation of the other deduction amounts’ in these cases and others that have received similar offers. More specifically, petitioner ‘request[s] that this Court enter an order directing the IRS to submit a settlement offer with consistent valuation calculation process—absent [certain deductions for certain operating reserves] and to extend the acceptance deadline until 14 days from the date the Court rules on this motion.'” Order, at p. 1.

Judge Eminent Toro doesn’t negotiate for parties.

“Under well-established contract principles, respondent, as the maker of the offer, gets to determine the terms of the offer. Williston on Contracts § 5:7 (4th ed.)(describing the rule that ‘[j]ust as the offeror is at liberty to make no offer at all, it is also at liberty to dictate whatever terms it sees fit if it chooses to make an offer. Among these requirements may be acceptance within a specified time, and if no acceptance is made within that time, the power of acceptance necessarily expires’ and collecting authorities)…. Petitioner is of course free to negotiate with respondent and persuade him that the terms of the offer should be revised to achieve consistency with other offers or for whatever other reasons petitioner considers appropriate. But resolution of those requests remains the province of the parties, not the Court.” Order, at p. 1. (Citations omitted).

I’ve chronicled the activities of the Fredonians’ trusty attorney elsewhere. Rather than cite to them, permit me to offer some advice free, gratis, and for nothing, with no guarantees, warranties, or representations. Might it not be a good idea to set up a phonathon with His Honor and IRS’ counsel, and have a wee headbanging session, rather than making motions?

See my blogpost “Old-Time Head-Banging,” 6/5/15.

Judge Emin (“Eminent”) Toro has another form for the Tax Court litigator’s file in Airbnb, Inc. & Subsidiaries, Docket No. 12423-24, filed 8/14/26. And Judge Eminent Toro didn’t draft a word of it (at least not expressly).

This Discovery Protective Order for Non-Technology Proprietary and Confidential Information was hammered out by the parties after a phonathon with judge Eminent Toro. Whether this resulted from what we used to call a head-banging session deponent knoweth not. And note this DPO doesn’t cover the treatment of technology-related materials, although the parties “will continue their efforts to reach [such] agreement.” Order, at p. 1, footnote 2.

Howbeit, text appears following order, page 1. I make no warranties, guarantees, or representations as to adequacy, fitness for purpose, compliance with law or regulation, or anything else. YMMV.

It seems Ch J Patrick J. (“Scholar Pat”) Urda has gone all Bundesliga with Tax Court jurisdiction. The former extensive paragraph describing “other IRS notices that may form the basis for a petition to this Court” that festooned routine want-of-jurisdiction petition tosses has been relegated to a footnote.

Is whistleblowing in the zone for promotion?

Solely by way of illustration of the foregoing and the source of the above quotation, see Cassandra John, Docket No. 3274-26SL, filed 8/14/26, at p. 2, footnote 2.