1 Unless otherwise indicated, subsequent section references

are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue.

T.C. Summary Opinion 2004-79

UNITED STATES TAX COURT

MARY ANNE O’LOUGHLIN, Petitioner v.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent

Docket No. 1112-03S. Filed June 10, 2004.

Mary Anne O’Loughlin, pro se.

Jeffrey A. Johnson, for respondent.

POWELL, Special Trial Judge: This case was heard pursuant

to the provisions of section 74631 of the Internal Revenue Code

in effect at the time the petition was filed. The decision to be

entered is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion

should not be cited as authority.
- 2 -

2 Respondent concedes the addition to tax under sec.

6651(a)(2) for failure to pay Federal income tax. Petitioner

concedes the $9,445 deficiency. The Court notes that the amount

of the deficiency is determined without regard to any payment of

estimated tax or credit for tax withheld. Sec. 6211(b)(1). The

tax due by petitioner, after a reduction of $4,167 for tax

payments in 1996 ($3,500 of estimated tax payments and

withholding taxes of $667), is $5,278. In the notice of

deficiency, the additions to tax under secs. 6651(a)(1) and

6654(a) were correctly computed to reflect the $4,167 payment of

tax. See sec. 6651(b)(1).

Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner’s Federal

income tax and additions to tax as follows:

Additions to Tax

Year Deficiency Sec. 6651(a)(1) Sec. 6651(a)(2) Sec. 6654(a)

1996 $9,445 $1,187.55 $1,319.50 $259

After concessions,2 the issues are (1) whether petitioner is

liable for the addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1) for

failure to file a Federal income tax return, (2) whether

petitioner is liable for the addition to tax under section

6654(a) for an underpayment of estimated tax, and (3) whether

this Court has jurisdiction to determine petitioner’s alleged

overpayment of taxes in 1993, 1994, and 1995. Petitioner resided

in New York, New York, at the time the petition was filed.

Background

The facts may be summarized as follows. In 1995, petitioner

was in a car accident and, as a result, suffered physical

injuries. She, however, continued to work and to perform other

responsibilities. Petitioner filed a return for the 1993 taxable
- 3 -

3 The burden of showing reasonable cause under sec.

6651(a) remains on petitioner. Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C.

438, 446-448 (2001).

year at some undetermined time in 1998, but did not file returns

for the 1994, 1995, and 1996 taxable years. Respondent granted

petitioner an extension of time to file her 1996 return, but

petitioner did not file a return for that year. Based on

reported third-party information, respondent prepared a

substitute return and issued a notice of deficiency for the 1996

taxable year.

Discussion

1. Addition to Tax Under Section 6651(a)(1) for Failure To File

If a Federal income tax return is not timely filed, an

addition to tax will be assessed “unless it is shown that such

failure is due to reasonable cause and not due to willful

neglect”. Sec. 6651(a)(1).3 A delay is due to reasonable cause

if “the taxpayer exercised ordinary business care and prudence

and was nevertheless unable to file the return within the

prescribed time”. Sec. 301.6651-1(c)(1), Proced. & Admin. Regs.;

see also United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S. 241, 243 (1985).

Petitioner claims that the injuries she suffered from the

car accident in 1995 constitute reasonable cause for her failure

to file a return in 1996. Impairment due to injury may

constitute reasonable cause for late filing if the taxpayer shows

that he or she could not file a timely return. See Williams v.
- 4 -

Commissioner, 16 T.C. 893, 906 (1951). We are satisfied that

petitioner suffered physical injuries as a result of the car

accident, but she failed to show that they were sufficiently

debilitating to establish reasonable cause. See Carter v.

Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-243, affd. in part 187 F.3d 640

(8th Cir. 1999). This conclusion is based on the fact that

petitioner, in 1996, continued her employment, remitted estimated

tax payments, and filed a request for an extension of time to

file her 1996 return. The ability to continue performing daily

business operations negates reasonable cause. See Dickerson v.

Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990-577; Fambrough v. Commissioner,

T.C. Memo. 1990-104. Respondent is sustained on this issue. 

2. Addition to Tax Under Section 6654(a) for Failure To Pay 

Estimated Tax

Section 6654(a) provides for an addition to tax “in the case

of any underpayment of estimated tax by an individual”. This

addition to tax is mandatory unless petitioner establishes that

one of the statutorily provided exceptions in section 6654(e)

applies. See Spurlock v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-248 n.9. 

But see Mackey v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-70. Petitioner

underpaid estimated tax for 1996 and has not shown that any of

the statutory exceptions are applicable. Respondent is sustained

on this issue.
- 5 -

3. 1993, 1994, and 1995 Overpayments of Tax

Petitioner argues that no additions to tax are due for 1996

because she had overpayments of tax from 1993, 1994, and 1995 of

$2,694, $2,039, $1,902, respectively, that should be applied to

offset her 1996 underpayment as “estimated taxes for the

following years.” We are a Court of limited jurisdiction, and

one of the requirements for the Court to acquire jurisdiction is

that a statutory notice of deficiency be issued for the year that

petitioner seeks our review. Moretti v. Commissioner, 77 F.3d

637, 642 (2d Cir. 1996). No statutory notice of deficiency was

issued for any of the years for which petitioner seeks a

determination that there was an overpayment. Furthermore,

section 6214(b) provides that the

Tax Court in redetermining a deficiency of income tax * * *

shall consider such facts with relation to the taxes for

other years * * * as may be necessary correctly to

redetermine the amount of such deficiency, but in so doing

shall have no jurisdiction to determine whether or not the

tax for any other year * * * has been overpaid * * *.

Accordingly, we have no jurisdiction to review the validity

of these alleged overpayments. See Moretti v. Commissioner,

supra.
- 6 -

4 While petitioner filed a return in 1998 for 1993, the

refund claimed was time barred.

Assuming that there were overpayments for 1993, 1994, and

1995, this result may seem harsh. But, the result flows directly

from petitioner’s failure to file timely tax returns for those

years.4

Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case

Division.

To reflect the foregoing,

Decision will be entered for

respondent with respect to the 

deficiency and additions to tax 

under sections 6651(a)(1) and 

6654(a) and for petitioner with 

respect to the addition to tax 

under section 6651(a)(2).