United States Tax Court

T.C. Memo. 2023-75

NOEL M. PARDUCCI AND KENNETH L. PARDUCCI, ET AL.,1

Petitioners

v.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Respondent

—————

Docket Nos. 20894-19, 6791-20, Filed June 21, 2023.

10830-20, 17749-21, 

17771-21.

—————

Jonathan D. Mishkin, for petitioners in Docket No. 20894-19. 

Richard C. Gano and David J. Warner, for petitioners in Docket 

Nos. 6791-20 and 10830-20.

Dennis Simpson (trustee), for petitioner in Docket No. 17749-21. 

Dennis Simpson, pro se in Docket No. 17771-21.

Kelley A. Blaine, Janice B. Geier, Karen O. Myrick, Alex R. Halverson, 

and Caitlin A. Homewood, for respondent.

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

BUCH, Judge: The Court held a partial trial in these cases on the 

limited question of whether the Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax 

1 Cases of the following petitioners are consolidated herewith: Jeffrey D. Hoyal 

and Lori D. Hoyal, Docket No. 6791-20; Crater Lake Trust, David Hoyal, Trustee, 

Docket No. 10830-20; Scenic Trust, Dennis Simpson, Special Trustee, Docket 

No. 17749-21; and Dennis Lee Simpson, Docket No. 17771-21.

Served 06/21/23
2

[*2] Return, filed for petitioner Dennis Lee Simpson for 2013 is actually 

his return. 

Mr. Simpson’s 2013 Form 1040 was not signed by him nor

accompanied by any document showing that he authorized anyone to 

sign it on his behalf. An individual return must be signed by the 

individual required to file the return or by an agent authorized to sign 

on behalf of the individual. If the return is signed by someone authorized 

to do so, that authorization must accompany the return. Because Mr. 

Simpson neither signed his 2013 Form 1040 nor included a document 

showing that he authorized an agent to sign it on his behalf, the return 

filed as Mr. Simpson’s 2013 Form 1040 is not a valid return. 

FINDINGS OF FACT

Mr. Simpson’s purported 2013 federal income tax return was filed 

on October 15, 2014. The return included two signatures: one for Curtis

Ankerberg, a certified public accountant who signed as the preparer, 

and one purporting to be for Mr. Simpson. Both signatures were dated 

October 15, 2014.

How Mr. Simpson’s purported signature came to be on that return 

is unclear. Mr. Ankerberg prepared returns for Mr. Simpson and other 

petitioners involved in these consolidated cases. Petitioner Noel 

Parducci, who at the time was an administrative assistant to Mr. 

Simpson and petitioner Jeffrey Hoyal, obtained the returns from Mr. 

Ankerberg and delivered them to Mr. Hoyal in his office. A short time 

later, Ms. Parducci took envelopes containing tax returns to the 

Jacksonville, Oregon, post office for mailing. Mr. Simpson’s purported

return was mailed from Jacksonville, Oregon, and we infer that one of 

those envelopes contained that return. Notably, Mr. Simpson was not 

present at Mr. Hoyal’s office and lived in Southern California at the 

time.

On August 2, 2021, the Commissioner issued a notice of deficiency 

to Mr. Simpson making adjustments to what purported to be his return. 

While residing in California, Mr. Simpson filed a Petition, assigned

Docket No. 17771-21. While the parties were preparing these cases for 

trial, Mr. Simpson questioned whether the return upon which his notice 

of deficiency was predicated was his return.

On February 22, 2023, the Commissioner filed a Motion to 

Calendar for Hearing the issue of “whether the tax return for petitioner 

Dennis Simpson for tax year 2013, upon which the notice of deficiency 
3

[*3] issued to Mr. Simpson was based, was signed or otherwise 

authorized by Mr. Simpson.” This new issue arose long after the 

Petitions in these cases were filed, and the resolution of this issue would 

likely affect the discovery and ultimate issues to be tried in these cases. 

Both Mr. Simpson and the Commissioner provided Exhibits and 

Prehearing Memoranda. Various witnesses testified, including James 

Greene, a forensic document examiner, who opined that the signature 

on the 2013 return was not Mr. Simpson’s signature. Mr. Simpson 

testified that he neither signed the return nor authorized anyone to sign 

the return on his behalf. No one offered any contradictory evidence.

OPINION

“Failure to satisfy the requirements for filing a return is fatal to 

the validity . . . of the return.” Elliott v. Commissioner, 113 T.C. 125, 128 

(1999). Section 6011(a)2 provides that “any person made liable for any 

tax . . . shall make a return . . . according to the forms and regulations 

prescribed by the Secretary.” A return required to be made must 

“contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under the 

penalties of perjury,” I.R.C. § 6065, and “be signed in accordance with 

forms or regulations prescribed by the Secretary,” I.R.C. § 6061(a). A 

return is signed if it is (1) signed by the individual required to make the 

return or (2) “signed for the taxpayer by an agent who is duly authorized 

in accordance with paragraph (a)(5) or (b) of [Treasury Regulation] 

§ 1.6012-1 to make such return.” Treas. Reg. § 1.6061-1(a). 

I. Whether Mr. Simpson Signed the 2013 Return

Mr. Simpson argues that the 2013 Form 1040 is not a valid return 

because he did not personally sign it. Although Mr. Simpson’s 2013 

Form 1040 includes a signature purporting to be his, he contends that 

he did not sign the return. Section 6064 provides that an individual’s 

name signed on a return is “prima facie evidence for all purposes that 

the return . . . was actually signed by him.” But this presumption is not 

absolute and can be rebutted. To overcome this presumption, Mr. 

Simpson must offer sufficient evidence to prove that the signature on 

the return is not his signature. See Soni v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.

2021-137, at *24.

2 Unless otherwise indicated, statutory references are to the Internal Revenue 

Code, Title 26 U.S.C. (I.R.C.), in effect at all relevant times, and regulation references 

are to the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 26 (Treas. Reg.), in effect at all relevant 

times.
4

[*4] Mr. Simpson has established that the signature on his 2013 Form 

1040 is not his signature. Mr. Greene, a forensic document examiner, 

opined that it is highly probable that the signature on the 2013 Form 

1040 is not Mr. Simpson’s signature. He provided the Court with 

exemplars of Mr. Simpson’s signature on various documents, and it is 

plain that the signature on the 2013 Form 1040 does not match, and is 

not similar to, those other signatures. Mr. Simpson did not personally 

sign the return.

II. Whether the Return Was Made by an Authorized Agent

There is no evidence that Mr. Simpson properly authorized 

someone to sign his 2013 Form 1040 on his behalf. Mr. Simpson argues

that he did not authorize an agent to sign the return on his behalf. He 

testified, examined witnesses, and provided various documents to 

support his position, none of which affects our conclusion. Returns made 

by agents must be accompanied by a power of attorney or Form 2848, 

Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative. Lombardo v. 

Commissioner, 99 T.C. 342, 356 (1992), aff’d sub nom. Davies v. 

Commissioner, 68 F.3d 1129 (9th Cir. 1995); Treas. Reg. § 1.6012-1(a)(5). 

Mr. Simpson’s purported 2013 tax return was not accompanied by a 

power of attorney or Form 2848. Therefore, the return failed to satisfy 

the requirements for returns made by authorized agents. See Mohamed 

v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2013-255, at *3–5, *12–13 (finding a 

return signed by a tax return preparer and business partner not valid 

because no Form 2848 authorizing the business partner to sign on the 

taxpayer’s behalf accompanied it). The signature on Mr. Simpson’s 

purported 2013 Form 1040 was not made by a properly authorized

agent.

III. Conclusion

Mr. Simpson neither signed the 2013 Form 1040 nor properly 

authorized an agent to sign it on his behalf.

An appropriate order will be issued.