TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Eduardo Sosa-Rocha
Docket Number: 4037-08S
Judge: Colvin
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 12/16/2009
Pages: 6

UNITED STATES TAX COURT Washington,j D .C . 2021 7 S EDUARDO SOSA-ROCHA , Petitioner , V . Docket No . 4037-08 S .COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE1, 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 herewith to petitioner and to respondent a copy of th e pages of the transcript of the trial of the above case before Special Trial Judge Lewis R . Carluzzo at Atlanta, Georgia, on October 21, 2009, containing hisioral findings of fact and opinion rendered at the conclusion of trial . In accordance with the oral, findings of fact and opinion, decision will be entered under Rule 155 . (Signed) Lewis R. Carluzzo Special Trial Judg e Dated : Washington, D .C . December 16, 2009 SERVED DEC 17 Zoog 1 Bench Opinion by Special Trial Judge Lewis R . Carluzz o 2 Docket Number 4037-08 S October 21, 200 9 2 3 Rosa-Rocha v . Commissioner 4 5 The Court has decided to render oral findings of fact 6 and opinion in this case, and the following represents 7 the Court's oral finding of fact and opinion . Th e oral findings of fact and opinion shall not be relie d 9 upon as precedent in any other case . 10 This proceeding for the redetermination of a 11 deficiency is a Small Tax Case conducted pursuant to 12 the provisions of Secttion 7463 of the Internal Revenu e 13 Code of 1986, as amended , and Rules 170 through 175 o f 14 the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure . 15 This bench o pinion is made pursuant to the 16 authority granted by section 7459(b) of the Interna l 17 Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and Rule 152 of the 18 Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure . 19 Hereinafter,, in this bench opinion, section 20 references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 21 as amended, in effect for 2003 . Rule references are 22 to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure . 23 Eduardo Sosa,Rocha appeared pro se ;. Brianna 24 B . Taylor and Alyson K'. Higgins appeared on behalf of 25 Respondent . Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 Y 3 1 In a notice!of deficiency dated November 14, 2 2007 (the notice), Respondent determined a deficienc y 3 in and additions to tax with respect to Petitioner' s 4 2003 Federal income tax . The deficiency and additions 5 to tax have been conceded by Petitioner . The issue 6 for decision is whether Petitioner's 2003 Federal 7 income tax has been overpaid as he claims in his 8 petition . 9 Some of the facts have been stipulated an d 10 are so found . At the!time the petition was filed, 11 Petitioner resided in Georgia . 12 Petitioner's claim that his 2003 Federa l 13 income tax has been overpaid is based upon fraudulent 14 Forms 1099-OID, Original Issue Discount, prepared b y 15 him (the fraudulent Folrms 1099) . Different versions 16 of the fraudulent Forms 1099 are attached to several 17 2003 Federal income tax returns prepared by Petitioner 18 and received (but not processed) by Respondent bot h 19 before and after the notice was issued . 20 Each of the fraudulent Forms 1099 show an 21 amount for "Federal income tax withheld" and th e 22 amounts so shown are taken into account i n 23 Petitioner's claim that his 2003 Federal income tax 24 has been overpaid by approximately $38,000 . A refund 25 for that approximate amount is shown on the variou s Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 4 1 2003 Forms 1040 submitted to Respondent, but the 2 refund has not been paid . 3 It is abundantly clear that the amount s 4 shown on the fraudulent Forms 1099 as "Federal income 5 tax withheld" have not been withheld and have not been 6 paid towards Petitioner's 2003 Federal income tax 7 liability . 8 An evidentiary dispute between the parties 9 was called to the Court' s attention and considere d 10 during the calendar call . The dispute focused on two 11 affidavits that Respondent proposed to offer int o 12 evidence in lieu of producing two out-of-tow n 13 witnesses at trial . Petitioner indicated that h e 14 would not stipulate to the affidavits, and each of the 15 affiants was called as a witness by Respondent at 16 trial . 17 Each witnessi was called to establish a point 18 that, as it turns out, : was not disputed by Petitioner ; 19 that is, that the fraudulent Forms 1099 were prepared 20 by him, and not by the organizations or entities shown 21 as the payer on each of the documents . Rule equines 22 that the parties stipulate to all matters that "fairly 23 should not be in dispute ." That the fraudulent Forms 24 1099 were not prepared by the payers shown on th e 25 documents unequivocally should not have been in Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 5 1 dispute and should have been stipulated directly, or 2 indirectly through the above-referenced affidavit s 3 reviewed at calendar call . Petitioner, no t 4 Respondent, should and will bear the witness costs for 5 the two witnesses called at trial by Respondent . 6 The nature of the issue here in dispute 7 requires no technical discussion, general o r 8 otherwise, with respect to original issue discount . 9 Petitioner's claim that his 2003 Federal income tax 10 has been overpaid based upon amounts shown as withheld 11 on the fraudulent Forms 1099, if not criminal, i s 12 certainly frivolous . A section 6673 penalty will be 13 imposed upon him as a result . The amount of the 14 penalty will be calculated with reference to the 15 witness costs incurred by Respondent in connection 16 with the trial of this' case . Those costs should b e 17 shown in an affidavit prepared by Respondent's counsel 18 and submitted in the form or, or as an attachment to 19 Respondent's Rule 155 computation . 20 The deficiency and additions to tax 21 determined in the notice are sustained . Petitioner' s 2 2 23 claim that his 2003 Federal income tax has been overpaid is rejected as frivolous . 24 To reflect the foregoing, and to allow for 25 the computation of a section 6673 penalty, decision Heritage Reporting Corporatio n (202) 628-4888 6 1 will be entered under Rule 155 . 2 This concludes the Court's oral findings o f 3 fact and opinion in this case . 4 . (Whereupon, at 1 :20 p .m ., the bench opinio n 5 in the above-entitled' matter was concluded .) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 0 21 2 2 23 2 4 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888