TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Horace Crogman & M. Trebeau-Crogman
Docket Number: 30811-21
Judge: Halpern
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 01/04/2023
Pages: 4

.2ri*; {;iu 'sj?r ''": t-/ '..._:,,.j @nite! btuttE @sx @ourt Washington,DC 20217 HORACE CROGMAN & M. TREBEAUCROGMAN, Petitioners V Docket No. 30811-21. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent ORDER 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 petitioners and to respondent a copy of the pages of the transcript of the trial in the above case before Judge James S. Halpern at San Diego, California (remote proceeding), on October 28, 2022, containing his oral findings of fact and opinion rendered at the trial session at which this case was heard. In accordance with the oral findings of fact and opinion, a decision will be entered for respondent. (Signed) James S. Halpern Judge Served 01/04/23 Bench Opinion by Judge James S. Halpern October 28, 2022 Horace Crogman & M. Trebeau-Crogman v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Docket No. 30811-21 3 1 2 3 4 tr J 6 2018 Eederal income 1-ax of $8,258 and an Petitione4r bears t:5/,6t: .) ,r/ THE COURT: The Court has decided to render the following as its oral findings of fact and opinion in this Petition.r) .utided in California when'tIJ atled a Respondent determined a deficiency in 7 B case. This bench opinion is made pursuant to the 9 authority granted by section 7459 (d) of the Internal 10 Revenue Code and Tax Court Rule L52, and it shall- not be 11 relied upon as precedent in any other case. 72 13 petition. 14 petitioners' 15 accuracy-related penalty of the 76 burden of proof with respect to the deficiency in tax and lj 1B the accuracy-related penalty. 19 20 respondent's adjustment to petitioners 27 income, princj-pa11y, disallowing a rental reaf estate 22 expense and business-related expenses for depreciation and 23 car and truck expenses. PetitionerL also failed to report 24 $118 of interest and $L,440 of unemployment compensation. Petitioners provided no substantiation for the 25 respondent bears a burden of production with respect to The deficrency arises because it was reported taxable .i a-:3J*!lra") i:i'u : ifi*iit:ar:rilr:.lJ.i:v:iiL*r: rlit . *\'* {t(,,i}ri1.iJ*t i/, u .ISH disallowed expenses, and we will sustain the deficiency. Petitioners made no argumenL that they did not receive the interest and unemployment compensation and we will sustain t-hose adjustments giving rise to the deficiency. 4 Respondent has t-he burden of production with respect to the accuracy-related penalty, which includes making a prima facie case that section 6751 (b) of the Internal Revenue Code requirements for written supervisory approval has been met. See, Ball v 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 B 9 10 Commissioner , r .C. vremoi 2o2o-tszi atltz Section 5751 (b) (1) provides;ho penalty under -.r* i t. Tsu lSg trsrl the immediate supervisor of the individual determinaLion or such higher official as the 11 12 this title shall be assessed unless the initial 13 determj-nation of such assessment is personally approved in l4 writing by 15 making such L6 secretary may designate. 7j burden with Exhibit 1-R, This concludes 18 lg and opinion in this case. 20 respondent. 2l YUYU the Court's oral f ir,rdings of f act Decision will be entered for Respondent has carried that 1) A11 right. That concludes this opinion (V[hereupon, at 1:35 p.m., the above-entitled matter was concluded. ) 22 23 24 25 r,.tr",li+ll'i.i:,j,i]: if*:;tj;r*:,11'*5;ril:,irrt tqt I;.s;* lr,::il,*r:,**! 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 B 9 10 11 72 13 15 76 71 1B 79 20 2L 22 23 24 25 CERT]EICATE OF TRANSCRIBER AND PROOEREADER CASE NAME: Horace Crogman & M. Trebeau-Croqman v. tr J Commissioner DOCKET NO. : 30811-21 We, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the foregoing pages, numbers 1 through 5 inclusive, are the true, accurate and complete transcript prepared from the verbal recording made by electronic recording by Amanda SeIf on October 28, 2022 before the United States Tax Court at its remote session in San Diego, CA, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the current verbatim reporting contract of the Court and have verified the accuracy of the transcript by comparing the typewritten transcript against the verbaf recording. Susan Patterson, CDLT-174 Transcriber Lori Rahtes, CDLT-108 Proofreader S3i14ti}i-*:;aS* 77/20/22 Date tT/23/22 Date