Opinion
36653-21S
01-04-2023
JOHN H. FULFORD, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Adam B. Landy Special Trial Judge
On December 9, 2021, Mr. Fulford filed a petition with this Court disputing a notice of deficiency (notice), dated September 17, 2021. This notice stated that the taxable year at issue was 2020, there was a deficiency in income tax, and proposed an accuracy-related penalty, pursuant to I.R.C. § 6662(a). As confirmed during a telephone conference with the parties on October 4, 2022, Mr. Fulford struck through 2020 and listed 2019 as the year at issue. Mr. Fulford left the taxable year on Form 2, Petition blank, and otherwise argued that the IRS sent him a notice for the wrong taxable year. Mr. Fulford contends that the correct taxable year at issue is 2019, not 2020, contrary to the printed notice. Mr. Fulford further argues that he sent full advance payment of $6,590 to respondent on or around March 10, 2021, satisfying the deficiency and penalty plus documents substantiating his entitlement to credits claimed on his income tax return for tax year 2019.
Respondent filed an answer on March 16, 2022, alleging that the notice was issued with respect to taxable year 2020. Respondent denied all other material allegations for lack of sufficient knowledge or information. By Order served June 14, 2022, the Court notified the parties that after review of the docket record the Court was concerned whether the notice for the 2020 taxable year underlying this proceeding was valid. The petition suggested that the deficiency was paid prior to the issuance of the notice. The Court ordered respondent to provide the Court with a complete copy of the notice upon which this case is based and either: (1) a report addressing and establishing the validity of the notice of deficiency for 2020, or (2) an appropriate jurisdictional motion.
On July 15, 2022, respondent filed a status report attaching the first three pages of the notice, attached to the petition, showing a proposed deficiency of $5,373 and an accuracy-related penalty of $1,074.60. Respondent also attached a Form 4549, Report of Income Tax Examination Changes and dated September 17, 2021, which he believed was attached to the notice proposing the adjustments to the earned income credit and child tax credits claimed by Mr. Fulford for taxable year 2020. However, this Form 4549 asserts a different proposed deficiency of $8,240 and an accuracy-related penalty of $455.40.
On August 12, 2022, respondent filed a status report stating that Mr. Fulford's case was assigned to an Appeals Officer who believed that the parties had reached a basis of settlement in this case. This report further stated that the Appeals Officer had prepared a draft decision document for petitioner's signature. This report did not specify the tax year at issue. On September 8, 2022, respondent filed another status report stating that he was conceding the case in full for tax year 2019, not 2020, and that a proposed stipulated decision had been sent to petitioner for his execution.
A settlement stipulation and proposed stipulated decision was filed on September 28, 2022, stating that Mr. Fulford was not liable for a deficiency or accuracy-related penalty for taxable year 2019, and Mr. Fulford was entitled to an overpayment of $6,590. Recognizing a dispute as to which taxable year is at issue, the Court held a telephone conference with the parties on October 4, 2022, to determine the proper tax year at issue. Petitioner argued that 2019 was the tax year at issue, and respondent was unable to state which taxable year is at issue. Therefore, the Court was unable to determine whether the year at issue is taxable year 2019 or 2020 to enter a stipulated decision. The Court ordered respondent to file a report addressing which year is properly at issue and attach thereto any supporting documentation, including the proper notice of deficiency at issue in this case.
Respondent filed a status report on November 3, 2022, stating that the proper tax year at issue is 2019 and attached an alleged corrected notice dated January 7, 2022. Petitioner did not file a petition with respect to this corrected notice. This purported corrected notice proposed an income tax deficiency of $5,373 and an accuracy-related penalty of $1,074.60. Also, in this report, respondent stated that on March 17, 2021, petitioner made a payment in the amount of $6,590.00 for tax year 2019. Respondent concluded that petitioner paid the alleged deficiency in full prior to the issuance of the January 7, 2022, corrected notice, and the Court does not have jurisdiction to redetermine a deficiency for taxable year 2019. Simultaneously, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction arguing that Mr. Fulford paid the amount of the alleged deficiency for tax year 2019 prior to the issuance of the original notice for 2020 and corrected notice for 2019.
The Court remains concerned regarding the correct tax year at issue. Based on the notice attached to the petition and respondent's answer, the proper taxable year at issue is 2020. Notwithstanding the petition and answer, the parties argue that the proper taxable year is 2019. Section 6212(a) authorizes the issuance of a notice of deficiency to the taxpayer when the Commissioner determines a deficiency as to that taxpayer. A statutory notice of deficiency need not take any particular form to be valid. Campbell v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 110, 115 (1988); see generally U.S. Auto Sales, Inc. v. Commissioner, 153 T.C. 94 (2019); Dees v. Commissioner, 148 T.C. 1 (2017); Bokum v. Commissioner, 992 F.2d 1136 (11th Cir. 1993), aff'g, T.C. Memo. 1990-21, 58 T.C.M. (CCH) 1183. A statutory notice of deficiency must advise the taxpayer that the IRS has determined a deficiency with respect to the taxpayer and must specify the year and amount. Id.
The Court desires the parties' views as to (1) whether the notice dated September 17, 2021, for taxable year 2020 is a valid notice of deficiency, (2) whether the notice for 2019, dated January 7, 2022, and allegedly issued after the petition was filed, is valid to give this Court jurisdiction over 2019, and (3) if the notice attached to the petition is valid for 2020, how the Court should proceed with respect to the pending Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction.
The premises considered, it is
ORDERED that, on or before January 31, 2023, respondent shall file a response to this Order as to (1) whether the notice dated September 17, 2021, for taxable year 2020 is a valid notice of deficiency, (2) whether the notice for 2019, dated January 7, 2022, and allegedly issued after the petition was filed, is valid to give this Court jurisdiction over 2019, and (3) if the notice attached to the petition is valid for 2020, how the Court should proceed with respect to the pending Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. It is further
ORDERED that, on or before February 17, 2023, petitioner shall file a reply to respondent's response and the pending Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. Petitioner is reminded of possible assistance available to respond to this Order and any other issues through low-income taxpayer clinics which can be found on the Court's website at https://www.ustaxcourt.gov/clinics.html and a list is also attached to this Order.
DO YOU NEED HELP WTH YOUR TAX COURT CASE?
Dear Tax Court Petitioner:
The United States Tax Court is forwarding this notice because you have requested Atlanta, GA as your place of trial and you are not represented by counsel.
There are tax clinics in your area that may represent you free of charge if you meet certain qualifications. If a tax clinic agrees to assist or rep resent you, the tax clinic can advise and assist you in resolving your case by settlement or trial. The tax clinics are not p art of either the Internal Revenue Service or the United States Tax Court. Languages other than English may be offered by a tax clinic. However, all Tax Court proceedings are conducted in English. The tax clinics that serve the city requested for your trial are:
PHILIP C. COOK LOW-INCOME TAXPAYER CLINIC
85 Park Place NE, Atlanta, GA 30303
P.O. Box 4037, Atlanta, GA 30302-4037
Phone: 404-413-9230
Fax: 404-13-9229
Web: https://law.gsu.edu/tax
E-Mail: taxclinic@gsu.edu
NORTH GEORGIA LOW-INCOME TAXPAYER CLINIC
234 Luckie Street, Lawrenceville, GA 30046
Phone: 678-646-5661
Fax: 470-777-2957
Toll Free: 888-267-6891
Web: www.gataxclinic.com
E-mail: esantos@gataxclinic.com
You should contact a tax clinic as soon as possible to inquire about possible representation in your case. Delay in contacting a clinic may make it more difficult for the clinic to assist you or for you to properly prepare your case. The United States T ax Court does not recommend a p articular tax clinic. However, the Court encourages you to contact a tax clinic.