Court Opinion

ID: 9905337
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-29 01:00:51.172287+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:03.058448
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-60326        Document: 00516982000             Page: 1      Date Filed: 11/28/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 23-60326
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                              November 28, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   Andrew Ethan MacTaggart,                                                           Clerk

                                                                   Petitioner—Appellant,

                                            versus

   Commissioner of Internal Revenue,

                                               Respondent—Appellee.
                     ______________________________

                Appeal from the Tax Court, Internal Revenue Service
                               Agency No. 7648-22L
                   ______________________________

   Before Davis, Willett, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Petitioner-Appellant, Andrew E. MacTaggart, proceeding pro se,
   challenges the order of the Tax Court finding a deficiency in income tax paid
   for 2019 in the amount of $23,071.
         The core of taxpayer’s argument to the Tax Court and to us is that the
   income in question he received from his employer for services rendered was
   not taxable. As the Commissioner points out, “[G]ross income means all

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-60326     Document: 00516982000           Page: 2   Date Filed: 11/28/2023

                                    No. 23-60326

   income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to)…
   compensation for services.…” I.R.C. § 61(a)(1). Petitioner offered various
   frivolous reasons why the payment for services was not income including that
   he was a “non-resident alien for income tax purposes.”
         The Tax Court considered all of Petitioner’s arguments in its well-
   reasoned oral findings of fact and opinion (bench opinion) issued on
   February 15, 2023. The court also properly rejected Petitioner’s argument
   that the Commissioner was not entitled to proceed with collection measures
   as authorized by the Tax Code.
         For these reasons and those expressed in the Tax Court’s bench
   opinion, the Tax Court’s order is AFFIRMED.

                                         2