TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Richard Albert Slater
Docket Number: 1052-07S
Judge: Colvin
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 01/08/2009
Pages: 5

ADM . RECORDE D SERVICE I CAL STAT . Ste . JUDGE FILE S UNITED STATES TAX ( OURT WASHINGTON , DC 2021 7 RICHARD ALBERT SLATER , Petitione r v . COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , Respondent O R D E R Docket No . 1052-07S . Pursuant to Rule 152(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, it i s 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 in the above case before Judge Joseph Robert Goeke at Albany, New York, on October 20, 2008, containing his oral findings of fact and opinion rendered at the conclusion of the trial . In accordance with the oral findi~gs of fact and opinion, decision will be entered for respondent .: (Signed) Joseph Robert Goeke Judg e Dated : Washington, D .C . January 8, 2009 SERVED JAN 0 9 2009 2 5 1 Bench Opinion by Judge Joseph obert Goeke 2 October 20, 200 8 3 Slater v Commissioner Docket No . 1052-07S 4 THE COURT : The Court has decided to render 5 oral findings of fact and opinion in this case and the 6 following represents the Courtl's oral findings of fact 7 and opinion . The oral findings of facts and opinio n 8 shall not be relied upon as precedent in any othe r 9 case . 10 This is a deficiency, case that was subject 11 to an election of the small tax case procedures unde r 12 Rule 171 of the Tax Court Rules of Practice an d 13 Procedure and Section 7436(c) of the Internal Revenue 14 Code . Here and after, Section references are to the 15 Internal Revenue Code . This Opinion may not b e 16 appealed to another court . 17 Respondent determined a deficiency in income 18 tax against Petitioner for the year 2004 in the amount 19 of $3,567 . Petitioner filed a timely petition and th e 20 case was tried earlier today,,October 20, 2008 . 21 Petitioner testified and the parties stipulate d 22 certain facts . Exhibits were also admitted in th e 23 record . The facts center on two payments to the 24 Petitioner in 2004 from John Hancock Company . 25 Petitioner to his credit has admitted his receipt of Heritage Reporting' Corporatio n (202) 628-4888 2 6 1 these two payments which he believes was a result o f 2 his father' s IRAs . 3 Petitioner's father 1ied in 2004 . 4 Petitioner asserts he did not the two Form s 5 1099-R issued by John Hancock reflecting the two IRA 6 payments to him in the amounts'Iof $7,422 .07 and $9,47 1 7 in 2004, but he agrees he rece ived the payments afte r 8 his father ' s death . As reflected in the record of 9 trial, the issues for decision are whether thes e 10 payments are taxable to the Pe titioner and whethe r 11 Petitioner should be discharged of his 2004 ta x 12 liability as a result of a bankruptcy petition under 13 Chapter 7 on September 21, 2005, which was discharged 14 on January 9, 2006 . 15 Regarding the incom tax consequence of the 16 two payments, Petitioner testified that the Joh n 17 Hancock agent advised his sibllings and himself that 18 John Hancock would take Feder l income taxes out of 19 the distribution checks from is father's IRA . 20 However, the Forms 1099-R do riot reflect any suc h 21 withholding credits . Based upon the record in this 22, case, Petitioner received cash distributions which 23 were income in respect of a decedent and which ar e 24 includable in Petitioner's grass income under Section 25 61 (a) (10) (10) (14) and Section 1,691 . Heritage ReportinglCorporation (202) 628- 4 888 2 7 1 Accordingly Responde is deficienc y 2 determination for 2004 is corr ct . The burden o f 3 proof is not at issue in this ase as the receipt an d 4 character of the payments in q .xestion is uncontested . 5 As to the claim of a tax withh lding credit, the 6 record establishes the payment were made without any 7 tax withholding . 8 Regarding the Chapte~ 7 bankruptcy petition 9 and the implications of that petition, the income tax 10 return for 2004 was timely filed less than three years 11 before the Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition . Neither 12 unpaid taxes due on the 2004 return as filed nor the 13 proposed deficiency in this case, which had not arisen 14 before the date of the order for relief, would b e 15 dischargeable . As stated in Ijtnarah v . Commissioner , 16 T .C . Memo 2008 -137, "If the IRS has a claim for taxes 17 for which a return was due within three years befor e 18 the bankruptcy petition was filed (the 3-year lookbac k 19 period) the claim is not dischargeable in a Chapter 7 20 bankruptcy case under 11 U .S .C . § 523(a)(1)(A) ." As a 21 result, the Court is left with no option but to ente r 22 a decision for Respondent . 23 This concludes the Court's oral findings of 24 fact and opinion in this case ., 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1 (Whereupon, at 11 :401,a .m ., the bench opinio n 2 in the above-entitled matter was concluded .) 2 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2 4 25 Heritage Reporting' Corporation (202) 628-4888