TAX COURT OPINION

Case: John Holder Trumbo
Docket Number: 197-08S
Judge: Colvin
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 03/10/2009
Pages: 4

UNITED. STATES TAX COURT WASHINGTON , DC 2021 7 JOHN .HOLDER TRUMBO , Petitioner v . ) Docket No . 197-08S . 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 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 Tampa, Florida-, on February 24, 2009, containing his oral findings of fact and opinion rendered at the conclusion of the trial . In accordance with the oral findings of fact and opinion, decision will be entered for respondent . (Signed ) Joseph Robert Goeke Judg e Dated : . Washington, D .C . March 10, 2009 SERVED MAR.: 1 1 2009 Bench Opinion by Judge Joseph Robert Goek e Trumbo v . Commissioner Docket No . 197-08 S February 24, 200 9 THE COURT : The Court has decided to render oral findings of fact and opinion in this case, and .the following 6 8 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 . This case was heard 9 pursuant to the provisions of Section 7463 of the Interna l 10- Revenue 'Code in effect when . the- tition was filed . 1 1 12 13 Pursuant to Section 7460 , the decision to b e entered is not reviewable by any other Court . And this opinion shall .not-be treated as precedent for any othe r 14 case . Unless otherwise-indicated, subsequent section 15 1 6 17 references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the,year in issue and all rule references .are .to the~Ta x Court Rules of Practice and Procedure . 18 This case involves a deficiency determination by 19 the Respondent for the taxable year 2005 in the amount of 20 - $6 .,0 02 . Respondent . initially also asserted the addition to .21 tax under Section 6662La in the amount of $1200, but attria l 22, Respondent conceded this addition to tax . The issue . 23 underlying the deficiency determination of Responden t 24 relates to an early distribution-from a retirement account 25 which the Petitioner received in 2005 and which was the Heritage Reporting Corporatio n (202) 628-4888 source of a 1099R which was attached to Petitioner's 200 5 While the Petitioner attached the 1099R showing the distribution from his retirement account in 2005, in the amount of $20,065 .58, the Petitioner did not actually record $20,065 .58 on his Federal Income Tax Return for 2005 . He . did however claim the withholding in the amount of $4,013 .12 shown on the 1099 on Line 70 of his Federal Income Tax Return and he was subsequently given refunds based upon tha t 10 withholding and the other withholding shown on his return . Petitioner was not able to establish and frankl y 12 admitted his use of the early withdrawal from his retirement 13 account did not qualify as an exception to the statutor y 14 provisions of Section 72(t (2') which require the inclusion of 15 such withdrawal in income and also require an additional tax 16 liability because of the early withdrawal . 17 Petitioner also admitted that at the time he made 18 the withdrawal he was not 59 and-a-half years old, bu t 19 rather was either 52 or 53 years old . Given these 20 circumstances the Court is left with no option but to uphol d 21 the deficiency because of Petitioner's early withdrawal from 22 the retirement account . The Court also accepts response 23 concession of the addition of this tax under Section 66 6 24 and deems that to be appropriate given the Petitioner's lack 25 of sophistication and his attempt to .notify Respondent o f Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 the withdrawal by inclusion of . the 1099R with his 200 5 Federal Income tax Return . As stated, the Court i s uphold the deficiency and relative to the deficiency decision will be entered for Respondent, and relative to th e addition to . tax the decision will be entered showing n o k addition to tax given Respondent 's concession . This concludes the Court's oral findings of fac t and opinion in this case . We can go off the record . (Whereupon, at 9 :35 a .m ., the bench opinion in th e above-entitled matter was concluded . ) / / / / //