TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Dudley Karl Williams
Docket Number: 3634-08S
Judge: Colvin
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 01/29/2009
Pages: 4

UNITED STATES TAX COURT Washington, D .C . 2021 7 DUDLEY KARL WILLIAMS, Petitioner , V . Docket No . 3634-08 S COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent . 0 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 of the above case before Special Trial Judge Lewis R .'Carluzzo'at Tallahassee, Florida, on January 13, 2009, containing his oral 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 . January 29, 2009 SERVED Jan 30 2009 1 1 Bench Opinion by Special Trial Judge Lewis R . Carluzzo 2 Williams v . Commissioner Docket No . 3634-08 S 3 January 13, 200 9 4 THE COURT : The Court has decided to render 5 oral findings of fact and opinion in this case, an d 6 the following represents the Court's oral findings of 7 fact and opinion . The oral findings of fact an d 8 opinion shall not be relied upon as precedent in any 9 other case . 10 This proceeding for the redeterminations of 11 deficiencies is a Small Tax Case conducted pursuant to 12 the provisions of section 7463 of the Internal Revenue 13 Code of 1986, as amended, and Rules 170 through 175 of 14 the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure . 15 This bench opinion is made pursuant to the 16 authority granted by section 7459(b) of the Internal 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 the years in issue . Rule 22 references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and 23 Procedure . 24 Dudley Karl Williams appeared pro se . 25 Benjamin A . DeLuna appeared on behalf of Respondent . Heritage Reporting Corporatio n (202) 628-4888 t 4 1 In a notice of deficiency dated October 25, 2 2007, Respondent determined deficiencies i n 3 Petitioner's 2004 and 2005 Federal income taxes . 4 Petitioner has now conceded the correctness of th e 5 adjustments that give rise to those deficiencies . The 6 issue for decision for each year is whether he i s 7 entitled to deductions not previously claimed on his 8 timely filed Federal income tax return . 9 Some of the facts have been stipulated and 10 are so found . At the time the petition was file d 11 Petitioner resided in Japan . At all times relevant, 12 he was employed in Japan by the U .S . Department o f 13 State (the State Department) . His Federal income tax 14 return for each year was prepared by or upon th e 15 advice of a professional income tax return preparer . 16 Petitioner's return preparer erroneously advised him 17 that his salary from the State Department for each 18 year was subject to the section 911 exclusion . Upon 19 that mistaken advice, Petitioner did not clai m 20 deductions he might have otherwise been entitled to 21 because, as reflected on each return, computing his 22 taxable income with reference to the standard 23 deduction reduced his taxable income and income tax 24 liability to zero . See section 63 . 25 At trial Petitioner took the position that Heritage Reporting Corporatio n (202) 628-4888 I 5 1 he should now be entitled to otherwise allowabl e 2 itemized deductions not originally claimed upon the 3 mistaken assumption that there was no tax advantag e 4 for doing so . According to Respondent, consideration 5 has been given to the allowance of itemized deductions 6 in lieu of the standard deduction, but Petitioner has 7 not provided sufficient information to allow fo r 8 specific deductions in excess of . the standard 9 deduction . 10 Under the circumstances, it .would not be 11 inappropriate to allow Petitioner additional time to 12 collect and present to Respondent any records that 13 support his claim to the allowance of itemize d 14 deductions in excess of .the standard deduction already 15 allowed for each year in issue . 16 To provide the opportunity for him to do so, 17 and to reflect the agreement between the parties on 18 adjustments made in the notice of deficiency, as well 19 as any agreement that might be reached regarding the 20 allowance of itemized deductions, decision will b e 21 entered under Rule 155 . 22 (Whereupon, at 12 :46 p .m ., the bench opinion 23 in the above-entitled matter was concluded . ) 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888