Attachment to Tax Court Petition

1. X The Petitioner requests the Notice of Deficiency be re-determined and his correct tax liability (if any) be determined.e is ready for settlement. I request a settlement conference with Appeals, etc. X C. Petitioner denies he has any tax liability, and disputes the figures and the contents of the NOD above listed. Petitioner disagrees with the computations, statements and conclusions in the said 90 Day Letter.
2. X For the tax years in question, Petitioner had dependents, deductions, business expenses, credits, allowances, tax preparation/advice expenses, charitable donations, etc. Further the filing status in the NOD is incorrect.
3. X The 1099s and W-2 forms information and other statements of income on the NOD are incorrect, false, or appears that way to me. I do not have information to substantiate the income figures alleged by the IRS. Apparently the figures used by the IRS stem from illegal immigrants who have gained, through identity theft, my Social Security Number for their employment.
4. X Petitioner requests waiver and abatement of all penalties. The Internal Revenue Code is so complex and confusing no one can understand it or comply with its multitudinous provisions.
5. X Petitioner requests credit for the illegal telephone excise tax of $100 for each year in question.
6. X Petitioner requests deductions and credits for cost and expenses of tax preparation and advise on filing. Petitioner incurred deductible expenses for a tax return preparation including books, DVDs, travel, etc.
7. X Due to lack of records, Petitioner needs to reconstitute records and provide reasonable estimations of business expenses as provided for in the Cohen case, below. This case shows that the tax court can use reasonable figures when records do not exist. The taxpayer can also reconstruct lost paperwork to substantiate deductions and business expenses.
   
   Further the taxpayer can claim a percentage of business expenses and profit for a business enterprise, even if he has no records to substantiate his business expenses. For example, a plumbing subcontractor could claim as expenses 60% of the form 1099s that the IRS received from the contractors.
   The 9th Circuit Court ruled in Cohen v. CIR, 266 F.2d 5(1959):

   “* * * We think our only proper course is to approach the problem indirectly by analysis of the record in the light of the principles established in Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 540 (2d Cir. 1930). Our objective will be, after resolving any reasonable doubts against petitioner, to reconstruct his gross income as betting commissioner at a figure, which in our judgment it would be unlikely to exceed in fact. (Petitioner, it is clear, has failed to establish a lesser amount.)* * *”
   

8. X Burden of Proof now on the Commissioner:
   1. The Restructuring and Reform Act passed on July 22, 1998 added IRC §7491 which shifts the burden of proof from the taxpayer to the Service under some conditions. The old common law rule that placed the burden of evidence in tax cases on the tax victim and not the tax collector has been some what ameliorated.
   2. Petitioner hereby request an acknowledgement that he is in compliance with IRC §7491, pertaining to the shift of the burden of proof. Petitioner requests that the IRS assume its burden of proof under this new law and that he be notified that Respondent has accepted his position.
   3. IRC §7491(a) (1) shifts the burden of proof in a court proceeding to the Service if the taxpayer produces credible evidence concerning the factual issues relevant to determining tax liability.
   4. Further, §7491(a) (2) provides the criteria for shifting the burden of proof to the tax collector, if the taxpayer:
      1. Meets all substantiation requirements required by the code
         
      2. Maintain all records required by the code
         
      3. Cooperates with any reasonable request for information by the Service.
         Taxpayer has met all these requirements and he request that an acknowledgement in writing on his claim that the burden of proof for any aspect of the tax liability no longer remains entirely on him.
9. Please take note that taxpayer has:
   
   1. Substantiated all of his deductions, expenses claimed by sending to the Service proper, authenticated books and records. Taxpayer gives up and revokes all claims that he cannot substantiate.
   2. Taxpayer has maintained all records required for the deductions and expenses that were claimed. Petitioner revokes and cancels all claims where he does not have the proper records.
   3. In all of his correspondence with the Service, he has requested an out-of-court settlement. Taxpayer has furnished all information requested by the IRS, as long as the request was relevant, material, reasonable and legal.
10. Taxpayer can answer further questions or furnish more information if requested by the CIR.