Opinion
5752-21
01-20-2022
David Lee Fair Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Maurice B. Foley Chief Judge
On February 4, 2021, petitioner filed the petition to commence this case. Petitioner did not attach to the petition any notice or letter issued to him by the Internal Revenue Service.
By Order dated June 7, 2021, the Court directed the parties to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that no notices of deficiency or notices of determination concerning collection action sufficient to confer jurisdiction on this Court have been issued to petitioner. On June 28, 2021, respondent filed a Response to the order to show cause, stating that it is his position that petitioner indicated in the petition that tax year 2018 is the year at issue and that no notice of deficiency or notice of determination concerning collection action was issued to petitioner for tax year 2018 sufficient to confer jurisdiction on this Court has been issued to petitioner.
This Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. It may therefore exercise jurisdiction only to the extent expressly provided by statute. Breman v. Commissioner, 66 T.C. 61, 66 (1976). In a case seeking the redetermination of a deficiency, the jurisdiction of the Court depends, in part, on the issuance by the Commissioner of a valid notice of deficiency to the taxpayer. Rule 13(c), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Frieling v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 42, 46 (1983). The notice of deficiency has been described as "the taxpayer's ticket to the Tax Court" because, without it, there can be no prepayment judicial review by this Court of the deficiency determined by the Commissioner. Mulvania v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 65, 67 (1983).
Similarly, this Court's jurisdiction in a case seeking review of a determination concerning collection action under section 6320 or 6330, depends, in part, upon the issuance of a valid notice of determination by the IRS Office of Appeals under section 6320 or 6330. I.R.C. sec. 6320(c) and 6330(d)(1); Rule 330(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Offiler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 492, 498 (2000). A condition precedent to the issuance of a notice of determination is the requirement that a taxpayer have requested a hearing before the IRS Office of Appeals within the 30-day period specified in section 6320(a) or 6330(a), and calculated with reference to an underlying Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under IRC 6320 or Final Notice of Intent To Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing.
On October 18, 2021, petitioner filed two Letters Regarding Summons. On October 22, 2021, petitioner filed a Letter from Petitioner. On November 23, 2021, petitioner filed a Letter by Petitioner. Petitioner did not provide a copy of a notice of deficiency or a copy of a notice of determination in these filings.
Petitioner has not provided a copy of a notice of deficiency or notice of determination that would confer jurisdiction on this Court. Because no notice of deficiency or notice of determination sufficient to confer jurisdiction on this Court has been sent to petition, this case must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
We note that Mr. Fair is no stranger to the Court. He has filed similar petitions with the Court at Docket Nos. 15165-06S and 8705-13S. Each of those cases were dismissed on the ground that no notice of deficiency or notice of determination was issued to petitioner.
Section 6673(a)(1) authorizes the Tax Court to require a taxpayer to pay to the United States a penalty not in excess of $25,000 whenever it appears that proceedings have been instituted or maintained by the taxpayer primarily for delay or that the taxpayer's position in such proceeding is frivolous or groundless. See Wnuck v. Commissioner, 136 T.C. 498, 513-514 (2011) (imposing a section 6673 penalty for tax protester arguments). Considering the allegations in this case and the similarities in this case and the cases at Docket Nos. 15165-06S and 8705-13S, petitioner's position herein is frivolous and groundless. Although the Court will not impose a penalty on petitioner in this case, he is admonished that the Court will strongly consider imposing such a penalty should he return to the Court and advance similar arguments in the future.
Upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that the Court's Order To Show Cause, dated June 7, 2021, is hereby made absolute. It is further
ORDERED that, on the Court's own motion, this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.