*143 Decision will be entered under Rule 155.
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
JACOBS, Judge: Respondent determined deficiencies in and additions to petitioner's Federal income taxes as follows:
Additions To Tax | |||||
Sec. | Sec. | Sec. | Sec. | ||
Year | Deficiency | 6651(a)(1) | 6653(a)(1) 1 | 6653(a)(1)(A) 2 | 6654(a) |
1984 | $ 2,794 | $ 698.50 | $ 139.70 | -- | $ 175.16 |
1985 | 6,602 | 1,650.50 | 330.10 | -- | 376.97 |
1986 | 8,941 | 2,006.50 | -- | $ 447.05 | 376.84 |
1987 | 1,691 | 422.75 | -- | 84.55 | -- |
After concessions at trial by respondent, the issues remaining for decision are: (1) Whether respondent correctly*144 determined the amount of income which petitioner failed to report for each of the years in issue; (2) whether petitioner is entitled to deductions for business expenses; and (3) whether petitioner is liable for the additions to tax.
All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code as amended and in effect for the years in issue. All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Petitioner resided in Rosehill, Kansas, at the time he filed the petitions. The stipulation of facts and attached exhibits are incorporated by this reference.
Petitioner filed a Form 1040 for 1985, 1986, and 1987. Each Form 1040 contained either the word "none" or the word "object" on every line which required information concerning the amount of petitioner's income, deductions, credits, or payments. Petitioner's objections were based upon his belief that the
With respect to each of the forms filed in 1985, 1986, and 1987, respondent sent petitioner a letter stating that the Form 1040 could not be accepted as a return because it *145 did not contain the information which the Code and the regulations require. Each letter contained
OPINION
Respondent determined that petitioner received unreported income during the years in issue as follows:
Year | Income |
1984 | $ 17,363 |
1985 | 28,847 |
1986 | 35,273 |
1987 | 15,470 |
Petitioner bears the burden of proving that respondent's determination is incorrect. Rule 142(a). He failed to offer any evidence that would satisfy his burden. Thus, we sustain respondent's income determination.
At trial, petitioner asserted that he was entitled to deductions for business expenses. Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and petitioner has the burden of establishing that he is entitled to all claimed deductions. Rule 142(a);
Respondent determined that petitioner is liable for additions to tax for failure to file timely returns. Again, petitioner bears the burden of proving that he is not liable for the additions to tax. Rule 142(a). He failed to do so.
Although petitioner filed a Form 1040 for 1985, 1986, and 1987, such forms did not constitute proper tax returns for such years. A document that does not supply information from which a tax can be computed or does not represent an honest and reasonable attempt to satisfy the requirements of the law does not constitute a return within the meaning of the Code.
The
Respondent also determined that petitioner is liable for additions to tax for negligence or intentional disregard of the rules and regulations, and for underpayments of estimated tax. Petitioner bears the burden of proving that he is not liable for these additions to tax. Rule 142(a). He did not offer any evidence that would satisfy his burden. Accordingly, petitioner is liable for these additions to tax.
To reflect certain concessions at trial by respondent,
Decisions will be entered under Rule 155.
Footnotes
1. Consolidated for trial, briefing, and opinion.↩
1. Plus 50 percent of the interest due on the portion of the underpayment attributable to negligence or intentional disregard pursuant to sec. 6653(a)(2). ↩
2. Plus 50 percent of the interest due on the portion of the underpayment attributable to negligence pursuant to sec. 6653(a)(1)(B).↩