Menu
Tax Notes logo

NINTH CIRCUIT FINDS NO TAX COURT ERROR IN UPHOLDING DEFICIENCY DETERMINATIONS.

MAR. 8, 2011

Smith, Carlos W. v. Comm.

DATED MAR. 8, 2011
DOCUMENT ATTRIBUTES
  • Case Name
    CARLOS W. SMITH, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
  • Court
    United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • Docket
    No. 09-71966
  • Judge
    Per curiam
  • Parallel Citation
    419 Fed. Appx. 758
    2011-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P50,275
    107 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1239
  • Code Sections
  • Subject Area/Tax Topics
  • Jurisdictions
  • Language
    English
  • Tax Analysts Document Number
    Doc 2011-4936
  • Tax Analysts Electronic Citation
    2011 TNT 46-13

Smith, Carlos W. v. Comm.

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

 

 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

 

 

Tax Ct. Nos. 10907-08 21318-08

 

 

MEMORANDUM*

 

 

Appeal from a Decision of the

 

United States Tax Court

 

 

Submitted February 15, 2011**

 

 

Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH , Circuit Judges.

Carlos W. Smith appeals pro se from the tax court's order following a bench trial upholding the Commissioner of Internal Revenue's deficiencies and penalties for tax years 2005 and 2006. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We review de novo the tax court's legal conclusions, and for clear error its factual findings. Johanson v. Comm'r, 541 F.3d 973, 976 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm.

The tax court properly upheld Smith's tax deficiencies because he did not substantiate his claimed deductions with any evidence despite being given numerous opportunities to do so. See Norgaard v. Comm'r, 939 F.2d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1991) (the taxpayer carries the burden of establishing entitlement to a deduction).

The tax court properly upheld Smith's penalties because he failed to meet his burden of showing that the underpayment was not a result of negligence. See 26 U.S.C. § 6662(a); Pahl v. Comm'r, 150 F.3d 1124, 1131 (9th Cir. 1998).

Smith's contentions that he was retaliated against are unavailing. See Karme v. Comm'r, 673 F.2d 1062, 1064 (9th Cir. 1982) (courts will look behind the deficiency notice to determine the Commissioner's motives only in extremely rare cases involving unconstitutional conduct).

Smith's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

 

FOOTNOTES

 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

 

END OF FOOTNOTES
DOCUMENT ATTRIBUTES
  • Case Name
    CARLOS W. SMITH, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
  • Court
    United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • Docket
    No. 09-71966
  • Judge
    Per curiam
  • Parallel Citation
    419 Fed. Appx. 758
    2011-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P50,275
    107 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1239
  • Code Sections
  • Subject Area/Tax Topics
  • Jurisdictions
  • Language
    English
  • Tax Analysts Document Number
    Doc 2011-4936
  • Tax Analysts Electronic Citation
    2011 TNT 46-13
Copy RID