T.C. Memo. 1999-152
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
ROBERT L. HAWES, Petitioner v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Docket No. 10611-98. Filed May 5, 1999.
Robert L. Hawes, pro se.
Paul K. Voelker, for respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
DINAN, Special Trial Judge: This case was heard pursuant to
the provisions of section 7443A(b)(3) and Rules 180, 181, and
182.1
1
Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are
to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the taxable years in
issue. All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of
Practice and Procedure.
- 2 -
Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioner's Federal
income taxes for 1991 and 1993 in the amounts of $6,154 and
$6,290, respectively, additions to tax pursuant to section
6651(a)(1) in the amounts of $1,539 and $1,573, respectively, and
additions to tax pursuant to section 6654(a) in the amounts of
$296 and $62, respectively.
The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner has
proved any error in respondent's determinations in the statutory
notice of deficiency, and (2) whether we should, sua sponte,
impose a penalty on petitioner pursuant to section 6673(a).
No stipulations of fact were filed in this case. Petitioner
resided in Las Vegas, Nevada, on the date the petition was filed
in this case.
Petitioner did not file Federal income tax returns for the
taxable years in issue. In a statutory notice of deficiency,
respondent determined that petitioner received and failed to
report gross income from various sources during the taxable years
in issue, including employee wages, nonemployee compensation,
unemployment compensation, and interest income. Respondent also
determined that petitioner is liable for the section 6651(a)(1)
additions to tax for failing to file his returns for the taxable
years in issue. Respondent also determined that petitioner is
liable for the section 6654(a) additions to tax for failing to
make estimated tax payments for the taxable years in issue.
- 3 -
The first issue for decision is whether petitioner has
proved any error in respondent's determinations in the statutory
notice of deficiency. Based on the record, we find that
petitioner has failed to prove any error in respondent's
determinations. See Rule 142(a). We will not address
petitioner's tax protester ramblings which were asserted in the
attachments to his petition, in attachments to his trial
memorandum, and at trial. As was stated by the Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit: "We perceive no need to refute these
arguments with somber reasoning and copious citation of
precedent; to do so might suggest that these arguments have some
colorable merit." Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417, 1417
(5th Cir. 1984). We hold that respondent's determinations of
deficiencies in petitioner's Federal income taxes for 1991 and
1993 and additions to tax pursuant to sections 6651(a)(1) and
6654(a) for 1991 and 1993 are sustained.
The second issue for decision is whether we should, sua
sponte, impose a penalty on petitioner pursuant to section
6673(a). Whenever it appears to this Court that proceedings
before it have been instituted or maintained by the taxpayer
primarily for delay or that the taxpayer's position in such
proceeding is frivolous or groundless, the Court, in its
discretion, may require the taxpayer to pay to the United States
a penalty not in excess of $25,000. See sec. 6673(a)(1)(A) and
- 4 -
(B). A position maintained by a taxpayer in the Tax Court is
frivolous "if it is contrary to established law and unsupported
by a reasoned, colorable argument for change in the law."
Coleman v. Commissioner, 791 F.2d 68, 71 (7th Cir. 1986). A
penalty is properly imposed when the taxpayer knew or should have
known that his claim or argument was frivolous. See Hansen v.
Commissioner, 820 F.2d 1464, 1470 (9th Cir. 1987).
We find that petitioner's arguments made in his petition, in
his trial memorandum, and at trial are frivolous. He has caused
this Court to waste its limited resources on his erroneous views
of the tax law which he knew or should have known are completely
without merit. In view of the foregoing, we will exercise our
discretion under section 6673(a) and require petitioner to pay a
penalty to the United States in the amount of $6,000.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
for respondent.