Opinion
9026-19W
01-10-2023
JOHN WORTHINGTON, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
David Gustafson, Judge.
Petitioner John Worthington seeks, in this "whistleblower case", our review of a notice of determination under I.R.C. section 7623. Now before the Court is the Commissioner's motion (Doc. 43) to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction, to which Mr. Worthington has failed to respond. We will grant the Commissioner's motion.
In T.C. Memo. 2020-141, we previously denied the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment; but we later ordered (see Doc. 42) "that, no later than 14 days after the D.C. Circuit's decision in Li[ v. Commissioner, 22 F.4th 1014, 1017 (D.C. Cir. 2022),] becomes a final, non appealable decision and the D.C. Circuit issues its mandate, respondent shall make an appropriate filing." On July 1, 2022, the Commissioner filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction (Docs. 43-44) that shows as follows:
A classifier in one of the IRS's operating divisions recommended rejecting Mr. Worthington's claim because the "[a]llegations are not specific, credible or are speculative." The notice of determination dated May 9, 2019, on which this case is based (and which is attached to the petition) states in relevant part: "The Whistleblower Office has made a final decision to reject your claim for an award. The claim has been rejected because the IRS decided not to pursue the information you provided."
The Commissioner's motion to dismiss relies on the opinion issued January 11, 2022, in the case of Li v. Commissioner, in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (to which all whistleblower cases under section 7623 are appealable pursuant to section 7482(b)(1)) held that the Tax Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over whistleblower cases in which the IRS does not commence any administrative or judicial proceeding based on the whistleblower's information. By order issued October 31, 2022, the Supreme Court denied the whistleblower's petition for a writ of certiorari in Li v. Commissioner. Accordingly, the judgment in Li is now final.
We ordered Mr. Worthington to file a response (see Doc. 45), but he has not complied with our order. We will grant the motion and dismiss the case. It is
ORDERED that the Commissioner's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is granted, and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.