T.C. Memo. 2008-141
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
DAVID JAHN, Petitioner v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Docket No. 6162-07. Filed May 21, 2008.
David R. Jahn, pro se.
Carrie L. Kleinjan, for respondent.
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
FOLEY, Judge: The issues for decision are whether
petitioner is entitled to itemized deductions relating to 2004
- 2 -
and whether petitioner is liable for section 6651(a)(1)1 and (2)
and section 6654(a) additions to tax.
FINDINGS OF FACT
In 2004, petitioner received $96,990 of wages and $2,280 of
rental income from Project Control Specialists, Inc., which
withheld Federal income tax of $14,407. Petitioner, who was
married and had not filed an income tax return for several years,
did not file an income tax return relating to 2004. For that
year, respondent prepared a substitute for return (SFR) which set
forth gross income of $99,271, withholdings of $14,407, married
filing separate status, one personal exemption, and the standard
deduction. On December 11, 2006, respondent sent petitioner a
notice of deficiency relating to 2004 and determined a deficiency
of $20,647 and additions to tax of $1,404, $562, and $133
pursuant to section 6651(a)(1) and (2) and section 6654(a),
respectively.
On January 30, 2007, petitioner, while residing in
Pennsylvania, filed his petition with the Court.
OPINION
Petitioner contends that he is entitled to itemized
deductions relating to 2004. We disagree. A taxpayer must file
1
Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and all Rule
references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
- 3 -
a return in order to elect to itemize deductions. See sec.
63(e)(2). Yet, petitioner did not file a return relating to
2004. Accordingly, we sustain respondent’s determination
relating to the deficiency.
Respondent also determined that petitioner is liable for
additions to tax for failure to file a return pursuant to section
6651(a)(1), failure to timely pay the amount shown on a return
pursuant to section 6651(a)(2), and failure to pay estimated
income tax pursuant to section 6654(a). Paragraphs (1) and (2)
of section 6651(a) provide, respectively, that a taxpayer shall
be subject to additions to tax for failure to timely file a
return and failure to timely pay the amount shown on a return,
unless it is shown that such failure was due to reasonable cause
and not willful neglect. Pursuant to section 7491(c), respondent
bears the burden of production relating to the section 6651(a)(1)
and (2) additions to tax. Respondent established that petitioner
failed to timely file his return and failed to timely pay the
amount shown on the 2004 SFR respondent prepared pursuant to
section 6020(b). See Wheeler v. Commissioner, 127 T.C. 200, 208-
209 (2006), affd. 521 F.3d 1289 (10th Cir. 2008); Higbee v.
Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438, 446 (2001). Petitioner’s failure to
timely file the return and timely pay the amount shown on the
2004 SFR was a result of willful neglect and not reasonable
- 4 -
cause. Accordingly, respondent’s determinations relating to the
section 6651(a)(1) and (2) additions to tax are sustained.
Unless one of the section 6654(e) exceptions applies, a
section 6654(a) addition to tax is imposed when estimated tax
payments, through withholdings or estimated quarterly payments,
do not equal the percentage of total liability required to be
paid pursuant to the statute. Niedringhaus v. Commissioner, 99
T.C. 202, 222 (1992). Because petitioner did not file a 2003 or
2004 return, petitioner was required to make an estimated tax
payment equal to 90 percent of his 2004 tax liability. See sec.
6654(d)(1)(B). Petitioner’s 2004 tax liability was $20,647.
Thus, petitioner was required to make an estimated tax payment of
$18,582 in 2004. Petitioner’s employer, however, withheld only
$14,407, and petitioner did not make any other estimated tax
payments relating to 2004. Accordingly, petitioner is liable for
the section 6654(a) addition to tax. Pursuant to section
6654(g), petitioner is entitled to a credit for the Federal
income taxes withheld from his wages. See Bagby v. Commissioner,
102 T.C. 596, 613 (1994).
Contentions we have not addressed are irrelevant, moot, or
meritless.
- 5 -
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
under Rule 155.