Opinion
24844-18
08-03-2021
Darren R. Jones, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
ORDER
Albert G. Lauber, Judge
Petitioner failed to file a Federal income tax return for 2014. Pursuant to I.R.C. § 6020(b) the IRS prepared a substitute for return (SFR) on the basis of third-party reporting, including gross proceeds reporting on Form 1099-B, Proceeds from Broker and Barter Exchange Transactions. The IRS issued him a notice of deficiency based on the SFR, determining a deficiency of $161,235 for 2014.
In his petition petitioner included only one assignment of error, namely, concerning the tax consequences of his sale of stock in United Parcel Service (UPS). He stated: "The stock was previously taxed as wages, and I would be responsible only for capital gains taxes. I will be providing a supplemental tax return shortly."
This case was continued from the Court's February 10, 2020, Atlanta, Georgia, trial session after petitioner represented that he had hired a CPA to prepare a return for 2014, which petitioner expected to be completed within a few weeks. On June 3, 2020, respondent filed a status report representing that he had contacted petitioner several times about the promised 2014 tax return, but that he had received nothing as of June 1, 2020.
By Order served June 8, 2020, we directed petitioner to submit to respondent, by July 7, 2020, a copy of his 2014 tax return showing what he believed to be the proper treatment of his sale(s) of UPS stock. In respondent's July 20, 2020, status report, respondent represented that he received petitioner's 2014 tax return on July 13, 2020, and he has since represented that this issue will likely be settled. But respondent also noted that the return included over $150,000 in unsubstantiated deductions, and that petitioner would need to provide information regarding these claimed deductions.
On January 20, 2021, respondent filed a status report representing that he had been requesting documentation from petitioner since August 2020, but that each attempt had been unsuccessful. We therefore issued, on February 9, 2021, an Order directing petitioner to supply respondent's counsel, by March 29, with copies of all documents on which he would expect to rely at trial in support of his claimed deductions. Respondent received nothing from petitioner by that date.
On April 6, 2021, petitioner informed respondent that he had previously sent the requested documents but that, as a courtesy, he would resend them. Later that month petitioner emailed various documents to respondent. Respondent promptly reviewed these documents and represented in his June 14, 2021, status report that they substantiate "very little, if any, of petitioner's [$150,000 of] claimed deductions."
By Order served June 16, 2021, we directed respondent to file another status report by July 30, 2021. We advised the parties that, if the report showed no meaningful progress in moving this case toward a resolution, the Court would set it for remote trial via Zoomgov during the Court's October 4, 2021, Los Angeles, California, trial session. On July 29 respondent filed his status report. He represents that petitioner has not provided any additional documents and that he attempted to communicate with petitioner on numerous occasions by telephone and email, without success. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that this case is calendared for trial during the Court's October 4, 2021, Los Angeles, California, trial session to be conducted remotely via Zoomgov. Because all trial sessions are being conducted remotely via Zoomgov, this place of trial is for administrative purposes only. The undersigned will be presiding. It is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall serve on the parties: (1) a Notice of Remote Proceeding that shall contain comprehensive instructions on how to participate in the Court's October 4, 2021, Los Angeles, California, trial session, and (2) a copy of the Standing Pretrial Order for the Court's October 4, 2021, Los Angeles, California, trial session.