T.C. Memo. 1996-480
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
PETER PAUL LAGASSE, Petitioner v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Docket No. 5319-96. Filed October 24, 1996.
Peter Paul Lagasse, pro se.
Carmino J. Santaniello, for respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PANUTHOS, Chief Special Trial Judge: This case was heard
pursuant to section 7443A(b)(3)1 and Rules 180, 181, and 182.
Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner's 1993 Federal
1
All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code
in effect for the tax year at issue. All Rule references are to
the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
- 2 -
income tax in the amount of $7,228 and an addition to tax under
section 6651(a)(1) in the amount of $215.
The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner
received taxable wages and unemployment compensation in the
amounts determined by respondent and (2) whether petitioner is
liable for the addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1) for
failure to file a return.
The parties were unable to agree on a stipulation of facts
in this case. Our findings of fact are based on the record
consisting of testimony of witnesses and documents submitted into
evidence.
During the period December 1992 through mid-February 1993,
petitioner was unemployed. During the period January 6 through
February 8, 1993, the State of Connecticut issued seven checks in
the amount of $198 each, for a total of $1,386, as unemployment
compensation to petitioner. The Connecticut Department of Labor
records further reflect that each of the seven payments to
petitioner was designated as $288; however, $90 was offset from
each payment to pay an outstanding child support order.
Accordingly, the total payments for unemployment insurance in
1993 paid on behalf of petitioner were $2,016 (7 X $288) although
petitioner was sent checks totaling $1,386 (7 X $198). A total
of $630 was sent to the Connecticut court to be applied against
the outstanding court order for child support. Sometime during
the last week of January 1994, petitioner was sent a Form 1099
- 3 -
from the State of Connecticut reflecting unemployment
compensation paid in the amount of $2,016.
Petitioner became employed by Mark Industries (Mark)
sometime in February 1993. Mark's records reflect that
petitioner was paid wages in 1993 in the amount of $40,125.02.
Petitioner was issued a Form W-2 by Mark in January 1994
reflecting wages paid in the amount of $40,125.02.
Petitioner did not file a Federal income tax return for
1993. Respondent prepared a substitute return reflecting the
unemployment compensation and the wage income. The notice of
deficiency determined that petitioner failed to file a 1993
Federal income tax return and determined a deficiency based on
the failure to report unemployment compensation and wage income.
The notice of deficiency also determined an addition to tax for
failure to file a return.
Petitioner argues that he decided not to file a return
because of alleged illegal and corrupt activity by State and
Federal officials. Petitioner further asserts that employees of
Mark were engaged in illegal activities including alteration of
records reflecting hours actually worked by petitioner and other
employees.
Respondent's determination in the notice of deficiency is
presumed correct, and the taxpayer has the burden of proving
error therein. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111
(1933).
- 4 -
At trial, respondent presented a representative of the
Connecticut Department of Labor as well as an individual who was
controller of Mark in 1993. The witnesses presented records of
their respective organizations that supported the amounts
determined in the notice of deficiency. Petitioner did not
present any evidence to contradict the testimony and documents
submitted by respondent supporting the determination. Petitioner
asserted that there was continuing corruption, and, therefore, he
would not comply with the requirements of filing a return and
reporting income. Petitioner has failed to establish that
respondent's determination is erroneous. Since there is no
question that the unemployment compensation and the wages
constitute taxable income, respondent's determination as to the
deficiency is sustained.
Section 6651(a)(1) provides for an addition to tax for
failure to timely file a Federal income tax return. Petitioner
was required to file a 1993 Federal income tax return on or
before April 15, 1994. Secs. 6012(a), 6072(a). Section
6651(a)(1) further provides that a taxpayer may avoid the
addition to tax if the failure to file was due to reasonable
cause and not willful neglect. United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S.
241, 245 (1985).
We conclude that petitioner's failure to file his 1993
return was due to willful neglect and not due to reasonable
cause. Petitioner's unsupported assertions of illegal acts by
- 5 -
his former employer and by State and Federal officials have no
foundation, nor do such assertions in any event provide a basis
for petitioner's failure to file a Federal income tax return and
report income thereon as required by law. Respondent is
sustained on this issue.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
for respondent.