TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Scott Darryl Reese
Docket Number: 28009-08
Judge: Colvin
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 04/14/2010
Pages: 6

UNITED STATES TAX COURT WASHINGTON , D .C . 2021 7 SCOTT DARRYL REESE, Petitioner , v . ) Docket No . 28009-08 COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , Respondent . O R D E R Pursuant to Rule 152(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, it i s ORDERED that the Clerk-of the Court shall transmit to petitioner and to respondent a copy of the pages of the transcript of the proceedings of the above case before Judge Diane L . Kroupa at Detroit, Michigan, on March 25, 2010, containing her oral findings of fact and opinion . In accordance with the oral findings of fact and opinion, decision will be entered for respondent . (Signed) Diane L . Kroupa Judge Date : Washington, D .C . April 14, 2010 .SERVED APR 15 2010 2 1 Bench Opinion by Judge Diane L . Kroupa 2 March 25, 201 0 3 Scott Darryl Reese Docket No . 28009-0 8 4 5 The court has decided to render oral findings 6 of fact and opinion in this case and the following 7 represents the Court ' s Oral Findings of Fact and Opinion . 8 These oral findings of Fact and opinion shall not b e 9 relied upon as precedent in any other case . 10 This bench opinion is made pursuant to the 11 authority granted in section 7459(b) and Rule 152 . All 12 section references are to the Internal Revenue Code as 13 amended and in effect for 2000, 2001 , 2003 and 2007, the 14 years at issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax 15 Court Rules of Practice and Procedure . 16 This matter is before the Court on respondent's 17 motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction filed Marc h 18 15, 2010 . Petitioner filed several documents with the 19 Court but none of them qualifies as an objection t o 20 respondent's dismissal motion . Respondent ' s dismissal 21 motion was set for a hearing on March 22 , 2010, i n 22 Detroit , Michigan . 23 Scott Reese appeared pro se . Alicia Mazurek 24 appeared on behalf of respondent . 25 FINDINGS OF FACT & OPINION Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 3 1 The record establishes or the parties do not 2 dispute the following facts . Petitioner resided in Birch 3 Run, Michigan at the time he filed the petition in thi s 4 case . 5 Petitioner filed a petition and checked both 6 the box for deficiency notices as well as the box for 7 determination notices . Rather than specificall y 8 providing the dates of the notices, petitioner noted that 9 they were 'too many to list .' He seeks to have various 10 frivolous penalties (plus interest) abated for a ten-year 11 period from 1997 to 2007 and seeks to remove any Federal 12 tax liens attributable to any penalties . 13 Petitioner alleges that the 'IRS blatantly did 14 not follow' its own rules and procedures in its dealings 15 with him'and that respondent has refused to answer FOIA 16 requests . Petitioner contends that he is not and ha s 17 never been an 'employee' of the Federal government 'nor 18 engaged in any federally taxable activity .' Petitioner 19 states that he is a private sector worker who has worked 20 for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 21 and the United Auto Workers for the past 15 years . He is 22 not an employee, however, nor has he ever worked for an 23 employer as defined in section 3401(d) . Petitione r 24 objects to being called a taxpayer . He has not received 25 'wages' as defined in sections 3401(a) and 3121(a) . He Heritage Reporting Corporatio n (202) 628-4888 4 1 has filed ' corrected ' W-2s and 1099s attached to hi s 2 income tax returns that adjust amounts received to zero . 3 Petitioner ' s tactics have increased th e 4 workload of both respondent and the Court . The record in 5 this case expands four complete files . Respondent ha s 6 previously filed numerous jurisdictional motions, which 7 the Court has granted , to dismiss 1997, 1998 , 1999, 2002, 8 2004, 2005 and 2006, all in orders dated August 26, 2009 . 9 The Court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as to those 10 years to the extent petitioner relies upon sectio n 11 6213 ( a) and section 6330(d) . With respect to each of 12 those years , the Court asked petitioner to provide any 13 deficiency notice or determination notice issued to him 14 that would potentially confer jurisdiction to this Court 15 but petitioner was unable to so provide . Petitioner also 16 failed to timely file a petition with respect to an y 17 notices respondent was able to locate . 18 Currently pending before the Court is a Motion 19 to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed on March 15 , 20 2010 . Respondent asks the Court to dismiss this case for 21 lack of jurisdiction upon the grounds that the petition 22 was not filed within the time prescribed by section s 23 6213 ( a), 6330 ( d) or 7502 for 2000 and 2001 . Respondent 24 also seeks to dismiss as 2003 and 2007 on the grounds 25 that respondent has not i ssued a deficiency notice , Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 5 1 determination notice or other determination that would 2 confer jurisdiction on this Court for 2003 and 2007 . 3 Respondent also seeks to dismiss as to the 2000 and 2001 4 civil penalties on the grounds that the petition was not 5 filed within the time prescribed by section 6330 an d 6 7502 . We agree and shall grant respondent's motion . 7 Petitioner's arguments are familiar to this 8 Court and other Federal courts and have been soundly 9 rejected on numerous occasions . By citing, out o f 10 context, selected text from the withholding tax 11 provisions, petitioner concludes that only Federa l 12 employees are subject to the Federal income tax on their 13 wages . Petitioner has followed in the footsteps o f 14 numerous others who have unsuccessfully attempted to find 15 a way to avoid paying Federal income tax . We find 16 petitioner's arguments to lack merit and not worthy o f 17 further analysis . For example, his argument that he does 18 not receive taxable wages has been rejected as many times 19 as it has been asserted . Abdo Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 6 1 v . United States , 234 F .Supp .2d 553, 563 (M .D .N .C . 2002) , 2 affd 63 Fed . Appx . 163 (4th Cir . 2003) ; United States v . 3 Romero , 640 F .2d 1014, 1016 ( 9th Cir . 1981) . 4 Accordingly , an appropriate order will b e 5 issued granting respondent ' s Motion to Dismiss for Lack 6 of Jurisdiction filed March 15, 2010 . 7 This concludes the Court's Oral Findings of 8 Fact and opinion in this case . 9 (Whereupon , the bench opinion in the above- 10 entitled matter was concluded . ) 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting. Corporation (202) 628-4888