Court Opinion

ID: 9926415
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-24 18:01:20.811522+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:47.002459
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        JAN 24 2024
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JEFFREY ALAN RISCHE,                            No.    23-70011

                Petitioner-Appellant,           Tax Ct. No. 1617-19

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,

                Respondent-Appellee.

                           Appeal from a Decision of the
                             United States Tax Court

                           Submitted January 24, 2024**

Before: BENNETT, BADE, and COLLINS, Circuit Judges.

      Jeffrey Alan Rische appeals pro se from the tax court’s denial of his motion

for summary judgment and grant of summary judgment in favor of the

Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Rische also appeals the tax court’s imposition

of sanctions under 26 U.S.C. § 6673. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C.

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
§ 7482(a)(1). We review the tax court’s grant and denial of summary judgment de

novo. Sollberger v. Comm’r, 691 F.3d 1119, 1123 (9th Cir. 2012). The tax court’s

decision to award sanctions is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Liti v. Comm’r, 289

F.3d 1103, 1105 (9th Cir. 2002). We affirm.

      The tax court properly granted summary judgment to the Commissioner,

because Rische failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to the amount of

his income in 2015 or the taxability of earnings he received in exchange for services

he performed, and his arguments were frivolous. See Grimes v. Comm’r, 806 F.2d

1451, 1453 (9th Cir. 1986) (reiterating that tax on income is constitutional and

earnings fall within the meaning of taxable income). The tax court properly imposed

sanctions on Rische for his continued presentation of frivolous arguments. See

Olson v. United States, 760 F.2d 1003, 1005 (9th Cir. 1985) (affirming penalty for

filing a frivolous “zero income” return).

      As to the Commissioner’s motion for sanctions, the Commissioner represents

the requested lump-sum sanction of $8,000 is reasonable in light of the average cost

the Tax Division of the Department of Justice incurred in litigating similar frivolous

taxpayer appeals from 2009-2011. Rische does not contest the reasonableness of

$8,000, nor does he present any argument as to the Commissioner’s calculation of

an appropriate sanction. As we have held in the past, a sanction in the amount of

$8,000 is reasonable and appropriate. See Banister v. Comm’r, 664 F. App’x 673,

                                            2
674 (9th Cir. 2016) (granting motion for $8,000 in sanctions); Carlson v. Comm’r,

604 F. App’x 628 (9th Cir. 2015) (same); Bates v. United States, 401 F. App’x 247,

248 (9th Cir. 2010) (same). Therefore, the Commissioner’s July 31, 2023 motion

for $8,000 in sanctions is granted. See Fed. R. App. P. 38; Grimes, 806 F.2d at 1454

(“Sanctions are appropriate when the result of an appeal is obvious and the

arguments of error are wholly without merit.”).

      AFFIRMED.

                                         3