PRETRIAL MEMORANDUM FOR Philip J.

NAME OF CASE: DOCKET NO.: 168xxx
Philip Jensen
Petitioner
v.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Respondent

ATTORNEYS:
Petitioner: pro se                                      Respondent: District Counsel
Tel. No.: No Phone                                      Tel. No.: 336-378-2110
 

AMOUNTS IN DISPUTE: Year(s)/Period(s)              Deficiencies/Liabilities          Additions/Penalties
                     Tax Year Ended 2005           $35,074.00                        plus interest and penalties. 

STATUS OF CASE: Probable Settlement __X___ Probable Trial _____ Definite Trial _

CURRENT ESTIMATE OF TRIAL TIME: One hour

MOTIONS YOU EXPECT TO MAKE:
Motion for Production of Documents
Motion in Opposition to Summary Judgment
Motion in Opposition to Penalties
Motion for Admission of Facts
Motion for Stipulations of Facts
Motion to shift Burden of Proof
Possibly some others.

STATUS OF STIPULATION OF FACTS: Completed _____ In Process __X_

ISSUES:
1. Hearsay by CIR
2. Lack of Authentication by CIR and ROE issues.
3. Abatement of Penalties
4. Cohen Case
5. Weimerskirch Case
6.Issues listed on Petition

WITNESS(ES) YOU EXPECT TO CALL: None at this time

SUMMARY OF FACTS:

Petitioner has deductions, dependents, un-reimbursed business expenses, credits, deductions for tax return preparation expenses, telephone tax credit, church donations , etc.

Petitioner is entitled to $50 refund of illegal telephone tax and Petitioner requests waiver of penalties.

Petitioner never received 40% of income, went to contract labor.

The income figures used by the CIR may have come from illegal immigrants using petitioner's Social Security number.

BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF LEGAL AUTHORITIES:

Reconstitution of Records

The Cohen case shows that Petitioner can use reasonable figures, instead of figures that cannot be correct. Petitioner can also reconstruct lost paperwork to substantiate his deductions and business expenses.

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.”

More to be submitted later

EVIDENTIARY PROBLEMS:

Petitioner has Affidavit of reconstructed deductions and expenses.

DATE: ___________________________________
Philip J., Pro se , Petitioner

Return to:
Judge John O. Colvin
United States Tax Court, Room 432
400 Second-Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20217