United States v. Miller

• Decision Date: 05 January 2016
• Docket Number: CAUSE NO. 3:14-cv-1696-RLM-CAN
• Parties: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, v. MARVIN D. MILLER, DEFENDANT.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Indiana

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MARVIN D. MILLER, DEFENDANT.

CAUSE NO. 3:14-cv-1696-RLM-CAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION

January 5, 2016

OPINION and ORDER

The United States filed suit against defendant Marvin D. Miller, seeking to recover several years' worth of unpaid income taxes, penalties, costs and interest. The case is before the court on the government's motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 23), which is unopposed.¹ For the reasons that follow, the court grants the motion and enters summary judgment in favor of the government.

I. BACKGROUND

Because Mr. Miller hasn't responded to or otherwise opposed the government's motion for summary judgment, the following facts are deemed

Page 2

admitted. For each year between 1991 and 1995,² Mr. Miller filed a tax return by submitting a Form 1040 listing his name and address and claiming exemptions for his dependents. The forms were incomplete in a number of material ways. Instead of listing his own and his spouse's Social Security numbers, Mr. Miller stated "rescinded" or "unknown." In the portions of the forms requesting information on Mr. Miller's income, deductions, or taxes owed, he either typed "00" or "None" or filled the spaces with asterisks. Elsewhere on the forms, Mr. Miller clarified that the asterisks represented a general objection to the question under the 1st, 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 13th, and 14th Amendments.

The IRS investigated and determined that Mr. Miller did in fact have income from his insurance sales business for the years in question. The Secretary of the Treasury made the following assessments against Mr. Miller:

Tax Period	Assessment Date	Assessment Type	Assessed; Amount
1991	07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 12/20/2010	Tax Assessed; Estimated Tax Penalty; Late Filing Penalty; Interest; Failure to Pay Penalty	$24,881.00; $1,085.16; $6,200.25; $47,499.04; $6,220.24
1992	07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 07/05/2004	Tax Assessed; Estimated Tax Penalty; Late Filing Penalty	$9,114.00; $397.50; $2,278.50

Page 3

	07/05/2004; 12/20/2010	Interest; Failure to Pay Penalty	$15,333.44; $2,278.50
1993	07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 12/20/2010	Tax Assessed; Estimated Tax Penalty; Late Filing Penalty; Interest; Failure to Pay Penalty	$21,495.00; $900.53; $5,373.75; $31,902.41; $5,373.74
1994	07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 12/20/2010	Tax Assessed; Estimated Tax Penalty; Late Filing Penalty; Interest; Failure to Pay Penalty	$16,200.00; $834.71; $4,050.00; $20,486.51; $4,050.00
1995	07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 07/05/2004; 12/20/2010	Tax Assessed; Estimated Tax Penalty; Late Filing Penalty; Interest; Failure to Pay Penalty	$19,675.00; $1,074.14; $4,918.75; $20,539.83; $4,918.74

Mr. Miller hasn't fully paid the amounts assessed against him, and his total debt to the IRS from the years in question had risen to $454,715.37 as of September 2, 2015 after taking into account payments, credits, abatements, statutory accruals, and costs.

In addition to these liabilities from the 1991-1995 tax years, Mr. Miller owes penalties for failing to properly file valid tax returns for the 2002-2010 tax years. For each of these years, Mr. Miller again filed an incomplete Form 1040 in which he refused to divulge his or his spouse's Social Security numbers, falsely reported no income, or made the same vague objection citing constitutional provisions. For these deficiencies, the Secretary of the Treasury made the following assessments:

Tax Period	Assessment Date	Assessed Amount
2002	3/29/2004	$500.00
2003	12/6/2004	$500.00
2004	5/30/2005	$500.00

Page 4

2005	11/3/2006; 11/6/2006	$500.00; $500.00
2006	10/22/2007	$5,000.00
2007	8/11/2008	$5,000.00
2008	12/28/2009	$10,000.00
2009	2/21/2011; 5/20/2013	$5,000.00; $5,000.00
2010	10/24/2011	$5,000.00

Mr. Miller hasn't paid these assessments in full, and his total debt to the IRS for the 2002-2010 tax years had reached $46,152.39 as of September 2, 2015.

II. LEGAL STANDARD

A district court must grant summary judgment if "the pleadings, depositions, answers to the interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); see also Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). A genuine issue of material fact exists whenever "there is sufficient evidence favoring the nonmoving party for a jury to return a verdict for that party." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249 (1986). In deciding whether a genuine dispute exists as to any material fact, a court must view all the evidence and draw all reasonable...