Opinion
9863-22S
09-30-2022
RACHEL TINKER & DAVID TINKER DECEASED, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge
On April 26, 2022, correspondence from Rachel Tinker was filed as a petition to commence the above-docketed case. Although that document was signed only by Rachel Tinker, it indicated dispute of an attached notice of deficiency for taxable year 2019 issued to David and Rachel Tinker. Rachel Tinker had also written "filing as surviving spouse" on the signature line for David Tinker. In accordance therewith and to protect all potential parties, the case was captioned in the names of both Rachel Tinker and David Tinker, Deceased.
Given that record, the matter raised the jurisdictional question of whether the case, insofar as it purported to be an appeal by or on behalf of David Tinker, Deceased, or his estate, was executed or filed by a fiduciary or personal representative duly appointed by a court of competent jurisdiction and legally entitled to institute a case on behalf of David Tinker, Deceased, or his estate. At that juncture, by Order served June 6, 2022, the Court directed Rachel Tinker to file a report on or before July 6, 2022, advising: (1)Whether Rachel Tinker or any other person has been duly appointed the executor, personal representative, or fiduciary for the Estate of David Tinker, Deceased, by a court of competent jurisdiction, attaching thereto the corresponding letters of administration or letters testamentary; or (2) whether Rachel Tinker commenced this case as the surviving spouse under Texas law, likewise attaching appropriate documentation to the extent relevant, such as an affidavit pursuant to Texas Estates Code Section 453.004. To date, nothing further has been received from Rachel Tinker or any other individual.
In general, Rule 60(a) of the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure directs that a case shall be brought by the individual against whom a deficiency or liability has been asserted or by a fiduciary legally authorized to institute a case on behalf of such person. The burden of proving that the Court has jurisdiction is on the taxpayer, and unless the petition is filed by the taxpayer or someone lawfully authorized to act on his or her behalf, the Court lacks jurisdiction. Fehrs v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 346, 348 (1975). In this connection, it should be noted that the Court, unlike the IRS, does not recognize powers of attorney as sufficient. Likewise, merely being named executor in a will is not sufficient.
Accordingly, upon due consideration of the foregoing and the record herein, it is
ORDERED that, on the Court's own motion, this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as to David Tinker, Deceased. It is further
ORDERED that the caption of this case is amended to read "Rachel Tinker, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent".