TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Michael D. Bickel
Docket Number: 27382-07
Judge: Colvin
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 02/05/2009
Pages: 5

UNITED STATES TAX COURT Washington , D. C. 20217 MICHAEL D . BICKEL, Petitione r V . Docket No . 27381-07 27382-0 7 COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, STAT . Respondent . ) O R D E R Pursuant to Rule 152(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, it is ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall transmit herewith to petitioner and to respondent a copy of the pages of the transcript of the trial of the above cases before Judge Thomas B . Wells at Miami, Florida, on January 14, 2009, containing his oral findings of fact and opinion rendered at the conclusion of trial . In accordance with the oral findings of fact and opinion, decisions will be entered for respondent . (Signed) Thomas B. Wells Judge Dated : Washington, D . C . February 5, 2009 SERVED FEB 0 6 2009 Bench Opinion by Judge Thomas B . January 14, 200 9 Bickel v . Commissioner . .. Docket Nos . 27381-07, 27382-07 THE COURT . The'Court has decided to render ora l findings of fact and opinion and the following 1 these -cases TOV/ represents the Court's oral findings of fact and opinion . The oral findings of fact-and opinion shall not be relied upon as precedent in any other case . These are the cases of Michael D . Bickel , 10 Petitioner, v . Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent, 11 Docket Nos . 27381-07 and 27382-07 . These cases were 12 consolidated by,order of this Court and are hereinafter 13 referred to as "the instant case ." This bench opinion is 14 made pursuant to . the authority granted by Section 7459(d) 15 and Rule 152 . 16 All section references-are to the Internal Revenue 17 Code, as in effect for the years in issue, and all rul e 18 references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and 19 Procedur e 20. Respondent determined a deficiency agains t 21, Petitioner for his 2004 taxable year in the amount of $4,739 22 and additions to tax for Petitioner's taxable year 2004 , 23 under Section 6651(a)(1), in the amount of $721 .58, Sectio n 24 6651(a)(2) in the amount of°$448 .98, and Section 6654 in the 25 amount of $88 .15, and a deficiency for Petitioner's 2005. .Heritage Reporting Corporatio n (202) 628-4888 taxable year in the amount of $21,526, and additions to ta x for Petitioner's 2005 taxable year, under Sectio n 6651(a)(1), in the amount of $4,792 .05, Section 6651(a)(2 ) in the amount of $1,703 .84, and Section 6654 in the amount of $853 .28 . Some of the facts and certain-exhibits have been . stipulated . The parties' . stipulations of fact are incorporated in this opinion by reference ., At the time th e „~W9f~ petitions filed, Petitioner was a resident of Florida . TBNr 10 In general, Respondent's determinations in the 11 notice of deficiency are entitled to a presumption o f 12, correctness, and Petitioner bears the burden of rebutting 13 that presumption by a preponderance of the evidence . Welch 14 v . Helvering , 290 U .S . 111 (1933) ; Rule 142(a) . Petitioner 15 has neither claimed nor met the requirements of Sectio n 16 7491(a), and, therefore, the burden of pr.oof .,remains on 17 Petitioner . 18 At trial, Petitioner offered no credible evidence 19 that shows that Respondent's determinations are incorrect . 20 Accordingly, we hold that Petitioner has failed to carry his 21 burden of proof . Prior totrial, Petitioner submitted t o 22 Respondent, along with purported -income tax returns for ; 23, taxable years 2004 and 2005, an affidavit containin g 24 frivolous and .groundless contentions .- These purporte d 25 returns and Petitioner's affidavit were-stipulated by the Heritage Reporting Corporatio n (202) 628-488 8 1 parties . After being warned by the Court that Petitioner's .2- contentions were frivolous and groundless Petitione r continued to advance those frivolous, and groundless arguments at trial . We perceive no need to refut e Petitioner's contentions "with somber reasoning and . copious citation of precedent ;, to do so might suggest that thes e 7 arguments have some colorable merit ." Crain v . Commiss.ioner , 737 F .2d 1417 (5th Cir ., 1984) . Accordingly, based on the record in the instan t 10 case, we sustain Respondent's determinations of tax in the 11 noticeSof deficiency in full . 16W . 12 As to the additions to tax, Petitioner bears the 13 burden of .proof . Rule 142(a) . Under Section 7491(c) , .14 Respondent has the burden of producing evidence that it is 15 appropriate to impose a penalty . However, Petitioner has 16 the burden of proof . Higbee v . Commissioner , 116 T .C . 438, 17 446 (2001) . The record shows that Respondent has met his 18 burden'of-production to show that it is appropriate to 19-impose the additions to tax in the amounts, determined b y 20 Respondent . Petitioner failed to offer any credible 21 evidence on these issues . Consequently, we sustai n 22 Respondent on the additions to tax in the amounts determined 23 by Respondent in the . notices of deficiency . 24 Section 6673(a)(1) provides that this Court may 25 require the taxpayer to pay a penalty not in excess of . Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 $25,000 wheneve r proceedings primarily for delay, or th e or groundless . As stated above, Petitioner was warne d during the trial of the instant case that his contentions are frivolous and groundless . Despite these . warnings , Petitioner continued to advance such contentions . Accordingly, we shall impose a penalty on Petitioner in th e amount .of $5,000 . See Funk v . Commissioner , T .C . Memo . 10 2001-291 . 11 decisions will be entered raw' 12 for Respondent in the amounts determined in the notices o f deficiency and a penalty under Section 6673 in the amount o f 14 $5,000 .($ 2,500 for docket No .' 27381 - 07 and $2,500 for docket , No . isy/ 27382-07 .) 15 The foregoing represents the Court's oral finding s - i6W 16 of fact and opinion in .1 -h 6s the anstancase. the )nstanf case . This concludes', the ca 17 (Whereupon ; at 11 :49 a .m ., the bench opinion i n 18 the above-entitled matter wa s 1 9 2 0 21 22 // 2 3 2 4 25 //