TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Janine H. Hansen
Docket Number: 9861-05S
Judge: Foley
Opinion Type: summary
Filed: 05/23/2006
Pages: 4

T .C . Summary Opinion 2006-F85 UNITED STATES TAX COURT .s ADM . RECORDED { 11 C 1,1' . L52A : . I I JANINE H . HANSEN, Petitioner v . COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,I Responden t Docket No . 9861-05S . Fil e May 23, 2006 . Janine H . Hansen, pro se . David W . Sorensen , for respondent . FOLEY, Judge : This case was heard pub suant to th e provisions of section 74631 of the Internal,' Revenue Code i n effect when the petition was filed . The decision to be entered 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all seltion references are t o the Internal Revenue Code in effect for th years in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court R les of Practice and Procedure . SERVED MAY 2 3 2006 a is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion should not be cited as authority . The issues for decision are whether petitioner is liable for tax relating to unreported income and for the section 6651(a)(1) and (2) additions to tax relating to 2000, 2001, and 2002 . Background Petitioner is the president of the State of Nevada Eagl e Forum, a State chapter of the National Eagle Forum . In 2000, 2001, and 2002, petitioner annually received $6,000 of non- employee compensation from a foundation associated with the National Eagle Forum (the foundation), yet petitioner did not file tax returns relating to those years . In a notice of deficiency dated April 5, 2005, respondent determined that petitioner is liable for tax deficiencies totaling $2,544, section 6651(a)(1) additions to tax for failure to file a return, and section 6651(a)(2) additions to tax for failure to timely pay taxes relating to 2000, 2001, and 2002 . At trial, on January 30, 2006, respondent moved for the imposition of a section 6673(a)(1) penalty . On May 31, 2005, petitioner, while residing in Sparks, Nevada, filed her petition . Discussion Petitioner concedes that she received income and failed t o report the amounts determined by respondent . Petitioner contends, however, that she is not liable for tax on these payments because of her religious beliefs . he Supreme Court has held that "Because the broad public interest in maintaining a sound tax system is of such a high order, religious belief in conflict with the payment of taxes affords no basis for resisting the tax ." United States v . Lee , 455 U .S . 252, 260 (1982) ; se e also Adams v . Commissioner , 110 T .C . 137 (19 98) , affd . 170 F . 3 d 173 (3d Cir . 1999) . Accordingly, petitionei is liable for the tax relating to the payments from the foundation . See sec . 61 (a) Respondent bears, and has met, the burden of production with respect to the section 6651(a)(1) and (2) additions to tax . See sec . 7491(c) ; Rule 142(a) . Petitioner does ; not meet th e requirements of any exception to section 66 :51(a)(1) or (2) . Accordingly, respondent's determinations a " e sustained . Se e Higbee v . Commissioner , 116 T .C . 438, 446 2001) . Respondent contends that petitioner'sposition is frivolous and that, pursuant to section 6673(a)(1), the Court should impose a penalty on petitioner . We, however, conclude that it is not appropriate to impose such a penalty in this case . Contentions we have not addressed areirrelevant, moot, or meritless . To reflect the foregoing, An appropriate order an d decision will be entered .