Michael Rosenfeld, (2011)
Linked as:
Extract
Michael Rosenfeld, (2011)
T.C. Memo. 2011-110
UNITED STATES TAX COURT MICHAEL ROSENFELD, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 12373-07. Filed May 23, 2011.Ned Leiba, for petitioner.Michael W. Berwind, for respondent.MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION DEAN, Special Trial Judge: For 2003 respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner's Federal income tax of $2,609 and an accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(a)1 of $521.80. The 1Unless otherwise indicated, subsequent section and chapter references are to the Internal Revenue Code (Code) in effect for the year at issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.issues for decision2 are whether petitioner: (1) Was an independent contractor or a common law employee of the British Consulate General (BCG) in 2003; (2) overcontributed to a simplified employee pension (SEP) plan; (3) is liable for the excise tax under section 4973(a) for excess SEP plan contributions; and (4) is liable for the accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(a).Preliminary Matters Respondent seeks to introduce into evidence the United States Engaged Staff Handbook (Handbook) issued in 2002 by the British Embassy in Washington D.C. as Exhibit 15-R.3 Petitioner objects to the admission of the Handbook on the grounds that it would cause confusion of the issues and constitutes hearsay. Respondent contends that the Handbook is admissible under the exception to the hearsay rule under rule 807 of the Federal Rules 2Petitioner presented no evidence and made no argument with respect to expenses reported on Schedule C, Profit or Loss From Business, that included deductions for business expenses and expenses associated with the business use of his home; the Court deems these issues conceded. See Money v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 46, 48 (1987); Stutsman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1961-109. Petitioner's deduction for self-employed health insurance is a computational adjustment to be determined consistent with this opinion.3Respondent proffered a document as ...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
