Opinion
14919-22S
01-05-2023
GREGORY DENIS, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Travis A. Greaves, Judge
On July 5, 2022, petitioner filed the Petition and attached to it the first two pages of the statutory notice of deficiency (SNOD) upon which this case is based. The attached SNOD included redactions of petitioner's taxpayer identification number, the deficiency amount, and the amount of asserted Internal Revenue Code section 6662(a) penalties. On August 25, 2022, respondent filed his Answer (Original Answer) and attached a complete copy of the SNOD which included, but was not limited to, the following forms: Form 5564, Notice of Deficiency Waiver; Form 4549, Report of Income Tax Examination Changes; and Form 6251, Alternative Minimum Tax Computation. All the forms that respondent included contained information supporting the adjustments and penalties asserted in the SNOD.
The parties settled the case, and on September 6, 2022, jointly filed a proposed stipulated decision. On September 8, 2022, the Court entered a decision stipulating that there was no deficiency in income tax due from, nor overpayment due to, petitioner for the taxable year at issue. The stipulated decision also reflected that petitioner did not owe a penalty.
On the same day the Court entered the stipulated decision, petitioner filed a Motion to Seal requesting that the Court seal respondent's Original Answer, or in the alternative, that the Court seal the exhibit attached to the Original Answer, which is a complete copy of the SNOD, on the ground that the SNOD contains sensitive return information that should not be made available to the public. On September 20, 2022, the Court ordered that respondent's Original Answer be temporarily sealed and that respondent file a response to petitioner's Motion by October 11, 2022. Respondent filed his Response on October 7, 2022, as well as a Redacted Answer that redacted some items of petitioner's personal information that respondent failed to properly redact in respondent's Original Answer. Apart from the corrected redactions, the Redacted Answer was the same as the Original Answer that the Court ordered temporarily sealed. On October 17, 2022, petitioner filed a Reply to respondent's Response.
Because the Original Answer included petitioner's personal information that should have been redacted, permanently sealing this document is warranted. We note, however, that petitioner has not filed a motion to seal with respect to the Redacted Answer filed by respondent and this Order does not address that document. At his discretion, petitioner may file a motion with respect to the Redacted Answer, wherein petitioner must show good cause for sealing the record and present sufficient factual evidence supporting his claims of harm that would result from disclosure in accordance with the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure and Tax Court precedent.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that petitioner's Motion to Seal is granted, and respondent's Answer filed August 25, 2022, is sealed.