Fluent Essays

PLEASE REPLY TO THE DISCUSSION IN YOUR OWN WORDS. ANSWER EACH QUESTION. APA FORMAT.Week 2 discussion Bruner vs Commissioner For this weeks discussion, read the tax law case in the hyperlink above (click on the link).  For your response, please address the following: 1.  What were your initial impression of the taxpayer? 2.  In your opinion, do you believe that the taxpayer had a reasonable basis for his arguments? 3.  Why do you believe the taxpayer took his case this far into court?  Do you believe he had a motive?  If so, what do you think it was? 4.  Do you agree with the judges ruling?  Why or why not? 5.  Do you believe this was a frivolous case?  Why or why not?| About LexisNexis | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Copyright © 2021 LexisNexis Date and Time: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 11:01:00 PM EST Job Number: 138507731 Document (1) 1. BRUNER v. COMMISSIONER, 1998 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 246 Client/Matter: -None- Search Terms: irc 61 Search Type: Natural Language Narrowed by: Content Type Narrowed by US Cases Court: U.S. Federal; Court: Tax Court http://www.lexisnexis.com/about-us/ http://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/terms/privacy-policy.page http://www.lexisnexis.com/terms/general.aspx http://www.lexisnexis.com/terms/copyright.aspx https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?id=urn:contentItem:3T3R-FR70-003N-200S-00000-00&idtype=PID&context=1516831 Cited As of: March 10, 2021 4:01 AM Z BRUNER v. COMMISSIONER United States Tax Court July 6, 1998, Filed Tax Ct. Dkt. No. 23790-90 Reporter 1998 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 246 *; T.C. Memo 1998-246; 76 T.C.M. (CCH) 40 ROSS WILLIAM BRUNER, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Disposition: [*1] An appropriate order will be issued and a decision will be entered for respondent. Case Summary Procedural Posture Respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue (IRS) determined deficiencies in petitioner taxpayers 1987 and 1988 federal income taxes and determined that the taxpayer was liable for penalties under I.R.C. § 6651(a)(1) for failing to report income, penalties under I.R.C. § 6653(a)(1) for negligence; and penalties under I.R.C. § 6654(a) for failure to make estimated income tax payments for 1987 and 1988. Overview The IRS received reports from the taxpayers employer, a pension provider, and a securities brokerage firm that the taxpayer had received, respectively, wages, a pension, and had sold securities, receiving income from the sale. The taxpayer did not file federal income tax returns for 1987 and 1988.The IRS determined a deficiency in, additions to, and penalties on, his federal income taxes and the taxpayer sought a redetermination. In response to numerous questions by counsel for the IRS, the taxpayer declined to offer any testimony relevant to the determination of his income for 1987 and 1988. His response to each question was I stand in silence. The court sustained the determination of the IRS and held that the taxpayer failed to prove any error in its determinations. The court held that that the taxpayer failed to prove that his failure to file tax returns was not due to willful neglect or that such failure was due to reasonable cause. The court found that the reporting payers withheld taxes from the taxpayers income sources and that the neither taxpayer made any estimated tax payments for 1987 or 1988, nor showed that any of the statutory exceptions were applicable. Outcome The court sustained the determinations of the IRS, which determined deficiencies in, additions to, and penalties on, the taxpayers 1987 and 1988 federal income taxes. Syllabus MEMORANDUM