honor out of this case it's been off the track from the start of the internal revenue service audit and the reason is that the internal revenue service took the approach where they have owners employees and they have a mailing list that they own themselves personally they have the real property owner personally and they have software dale one of the owners or husband wife on the entire corporation who made the method totally automated internal revenue service then had any authority to do would be to reallocate the royalties paid and the rent paid into dividends which is an income tax case under and they did have a code section allowing amounts drawn from a closely held corporation under forty two of the internal revenue code here the internal revenue service jumping to attempt to find the wages of one of the owners when both were the government agrees in its brief that this case required or that the operation of the business required minimal labor asking this court to reverse all four years and the reason is that we paid her in the course of a pair of new agey knew that and we class fighters an employee for the four hundred a month we did not share she was not an employee easy for the four hundred dollar s it's like at a point where when you see that you're losing then if the parties can make concessions and when it's not going their way they say that the court didn't have  i think what we're trying to understand is and then the commissioner one and they still want to say well that's not good enough because i think they want to reason they're trying to reserve some other arrows in their quiver they're afraid that the course you're i'm sure i try to get we were surprised at the end of the trial and i frankly i probably should have known but i frankly didn't know what they were talking about when they wanted to dismiss those three years and i  the start of the three year statute and opposing may disagree with me so that i believe now again this may require further research that the government would be too late in the three years they could not collect  correct your honor i think earlier i said there was a controversy about employee and other status that it is not correct if i did say that there was never a disputed asked to whether or not charlotte was an employee for support that position for a new trial he then continued to be an advocate which we did not raise in our brief when he decided the issue when both parties wanted to quit at and we feel that he had no really is the advocate for the three years in this corps and to an extent and i have a high regard for the knife circuit to an extent this court may have to be the advocate which again has the same spent to the files we all know as you know i might more prepared today than i was a week ago for my court cases in the end because two weeks before essentially if you make a mistake in the first instance and you don't discover it so you're in litigation the taxpayers mistake at that point in time then you want to be able to dismiss it because the court doesn't have you're going to say even no based on a notice it looks like you had jurisdiction but now we know that you're wrong we wanted dismissed and now we want to go back and do it right you know unfortunately you know and i understand that now unfortunately i think the parties dealt with it more as this case and this is exactly what i was talking about it's something bigger there's something and you know i mean if it isn't you know you know we don't have you know i don't think that the briefing is as complete on that issue of what you're asking for as it could be before you know you i'm sorry mom now i mean it's not as you know i just think we're not getting the court's perspective be there on this either you know we're getting the commissioner's perspective you know the court obviously has and the the has somewhat of a different agenda as opposed to not really to defend the jurisdiction issues that palestinian you take that or year because he had promised to do the you know kind of the shotgun approach you've got to take every approach that you think that you require we're dealing with a very small employer here in the scheme of things but for other employers that that have you know where there's a split in a man in dispute it seems to me that the tax court is a friendlier court for the like i'm just saying that this e mails nothing that great if you just taking one employee and what they are but apparently you're concerned is what if it was a big corporation then you don't want that in tax court no we don't care where it goes we just need to don't have any application here section five thirty is dealt with three years of when somebody if you're an independent contractor of course and and those have been huge disputes on something that the i r s would like to know it would help me if you could trace through what happens when the action is then the statute of limitations is told and still that proceeding becomes final and for right sixty days there that wow that's true but that's when the government sets up but i do want to point out i've respectfully i think that the court the court is wrong and looking at the notice of determination because this is  it to solve the real issue is what the should've done and they should've amended the statute which the idea of for another reason and it was retroactive the one nine hundred ninety seven judge justice the odell's this is a small case many times that the justice department and the i r s looks for a small case often of where the pros they representation to use this nationwide all we  says whatever it is we should have withheld fifteen thousand bucks and we get it back i can fill the court but if i continue to handle a case and we have to pay we're going to ask that it be applied against the odell's personal income currently so this just circles around but of course the real cost is the other value of paying me and they've already lost in that viewpoint or they are not going to win any of it because they've had to pay me no controversy about that for the five one and there's no controversy about that and i could tell the court regarding district court we would've paid but we weren't sure whether there's any more