Trial Calendar: Columbia, SC
Date: March 17, 2008

PRETRIAL MEMORANDUM FOR Rhonda Patriot

NAME OF CASE:  DOCKET NO.: 3225-00
Rhonda Patriot
Petitioner
v.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Respondent

ATTORNEYS:
Petitioner: pro se                               Respondent: District Counsel
Tel. No.: ___________                    Tel. No.: ________________

AMOUNTS IN DISPUTE:     Year(s)/Period(s)                               Deficiencies/Liabilities                                     Additions/Penalties
Tax Year Ended                         2004                                                 $1337.00                                                       $547.00

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

CURRENT ESTIMATE OF TRIAL TIME: One hour

MOTIONS YOU EXPECT TO MAKE: (Title and brief description)
Motion for Production of Documents
Motion in Opposition to Summary Judgment
Motion in Opposition to Penalties
Damages under IRC 6673 against Respondent.

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. Issues listed on Petition

WITNESS(ES) YOU EXPECT TO CALL: (Name and brief summary of expected testimony)
None at this time.

SUMMARY OF FACTS: (Attach separate pages, if necessary, to inform Court of facts in chronological narrative form)
Petitioner has deductions, dependents, un-reimbursed business expenses, credits, deductions for tax return preparation expenses, telephone tax credit, etc.
Petitioner is entitled to $50 refund of illegal telephone tax and Petitioner requests waiver of penalties.
The income figures used by the CIR may have come from illegal immigrants using petitioner's Social Security number.
BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF LEGAL AUTHORITIES: (Attach separate pages, if necessary, to discuss fully your legal position)

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 expense receipts, canceled checks, etc. which she seeks to admit as evidence.

DATE: January 31, 2008  ___________________________________
Rhonda Patriot, Petitioner

Return to:
Judge Thomas B. Wells
United States Tax Court, Room 432
400 Second-Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20217