Taking the Fifth

Almost everyone knows the text of the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
[emphasis added]

Thus, in a court case (including Tax Court), you cannot be forced to testify and/or incriminate yourself.

Today, the Tax Court released a number of opinions where plaintiff’s asserted fifth amendment rights. But this doesn’t mean that you can stand mute in Tax Court and win your case. The petitioners lost all the cases.

In a criminal case, the prosecution must prove its’ case beyond a reasonable doubt. Tax Court is different. Tax Court has been set up to resolve tax disputes, not criminal matters. And, generally, the petitioner has the burden of proof, not the respondent (the IRS). “Petitioner contends that respondent generally bears the burden of proof. We disagree.” There are exceptions to this standard, notably: “If a taxpayer asserts a reasonable dispute with respect to any item of income reported on a third-party information return and the taxpayer has fully cooperated with the Secretary, the Secretary has the burden of producing reasonable and probative information concerning that deficiency in addition to such information return.” “Once there is evidence of actual receipt of funds by the taxpayer, the taxpayer has the burden of proving that all or part of those funds is not taxable.” But if you don’t assert anything, the petitioner (taxpayer) has the burden of proof.

Finally, as the Court notes, “Before trial, petitioner asserted Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. However, even if petitioner’s claim were bona fide (which we need not decide), it would have no effect on petitioner’s burden of proof. See United States v. Rylander, 460 U.S. 752, 758 (1983); Petzoldt v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 661, 684-685 (1989); Traficant v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 501, 504 (1987), affd. 884 F.2d 258 (6th Cir. 1989).”

See:
Richardson v. Commissioner (TC Memo 2005-143);
Krohn v. Commissioner (TC Memo 2005-145);
and Howard v. Commissioner (TC Memo 2005-144)

Posted in Tax Court | Comments Off on Taking the Fifth

More Bad Paperwork From the FTB

I recently wrote a post about my company’s receipt of a letter mandating participation in California’s electronic tax payment program. Two weeks following receipt of that letter I received a call from someone at the FTB acknowledging that my company really shouldn’t have to enroll in that program. Apparently someone (or some business) has been erroneously using the wrong corporation number. I was told that I would not receive an official “I don’t have to enroll” letter but that I didn’t.

End of story?

Not hardly. This past week I received another letter from the FTB again mandating my enrollment in the program. I was mildly amused, but I wrote a letter (sent certified mail) to the FTB. I’ll keep you posted.

Posted in California | Comments Off on More Bad Paperwork From the FTB

Is Orange County Following San Diego?

San Diego may be the city with the best climate in the world; however, its’ pension system has driven the city to near bankruptcy. John Moorlach, Orange County’s Treasurer-Tax Collector, wrote an op-ed piece in today’s Register about the parallels. It’s must reading for any resident of OC and, frankly, any Californian. (One-time registration required to read the article.)

Samuel Johnson put it well: Whatever you make, spend less. Mr. Moorlach believes that the Orange County Employees’ Retirement System is doing a better job than San Diego; however, with an unfunded liability of somewhere between $1 and $2 billion, problems lurk in the future.

I should point out that San Diego’s pension problems appear (allegedly) to also have causes from illegal activities by their pension oversight board—problems that do not exist in Orange County. As Mr. Moorlach put it, “…San Diego’s retirement board has been caught with its hand in the cookie jar….”

With the Democratic legislature following in lock-step with the labor unions, a Democratic governor could cause further problems through mandated larger benefits. All-in-all, this is a situation to watch in the future.

Posted in California | Comments Off on Is Orange County Following San Diego?

NIMBY and Home Prices

In a comment to my post on real estate prices, Andrew asked if I had any backup for my statement that restrictions (environmental and otherwise) are increasing the costs of new homes. And there’s plenty available in the literature.

This study shows that for a new home in Vancouver, WA, about 18% of the home’s price is caused by regulations. This article talks about NIMBYism & Boston’s housing market. This paper describes regulatory barriers and housing prices. Finally, this paper looks at environmental regulations and urges more academic looks at this issue.

However, I don’t think you have to be an academic to come to the conclusion that NIMBY is impacting housing prices. Take Houston, TX. There is (famously) no zoning in Houston. Houston remains one of the most affordable cities in the United States. Contrast this with the Bay Area, where there’s a lack of land to build (it’s largely built out), numerous environmental regulations, strict zoning, and a large amount of land that can’t be built on (mountains, earthquake faults, etc.).

Posted in California | 3 Comments

Indepndent Contractors

The Franchise Tax Board and the Employment Development Department don’t believe there is such a thing as an independent contractor. Indeed, California’s rules and regulations on independent contractors are much stricter than the IRS’s rules. So it should come as no surprise that the EDD is continuing its’ war on contractors.

The latest battle is against “temporary” doctors. According to this article in the San Francisco Chronicle, the EDD is challenging Staff Care Inc.’s use of independent contractor doctors.

Registry of Physician Services, another temporary doctor staffing company, also received a bill from the EDD. Oh, who is Registry’s client? The State of California (Department of Corrections).

Legislation is pending to correct this, at least for doctors. SB279, by Gil Cedillo, is pending and would make “locum tenens” doctors independent contractors by statute.

Posted in California | Comments Off on Indepndent Contractors

A Bubble? Or Taxes? Or Supply and Demand?

Real estate prices in Southern California (where I reside) continue on an upwards trajectory. The Los Angeles Times (one-time registration required) has an interesting article that speculates on why people are not selling their homes. The article notes property taxes and transaction costs as two of the main reasons why.

However, the article doesn’t address the main “culprit.” (I’m not even sure that culprit is the right word. On paper, this boom has made me a lot of money.) It’s NIMBY.

Basic economics state that if supply is constant but demand increases, price increases. There is almost no land available to build new homes. What land there is has environmental restrictions, traffic restrictions, and other restrictions placed on it, decreasing the number of new homes built and increasing their cost.

Posted in California | 1 Comment

Bureaucrateze

You’ll be happy to know that the IRS is closing 68 Taxpayer Assistance Centers (TACs) as “…part of the agency’s continuing efforts to create efficiencies, modernize operations, and reduce costs while maintaining [our] commitment to public service.”

Of course, as mentioned previously, the real reason is a 1% budget cutback. The IRS’s criteria used to choose the 68 TACs to be closed can be found here.

Posted in IRS | Comments Off on Bureaucrateze

I Don’t Think It’s Close…

…But the Tax Court does.

In a case released today, a man thinks he has some additional 1099s. He has not received copies of his statements on these accounts (they are education accounts for his children). He calls and writes his bank, and asks for copies. He calls and write his ex-spouse, asking for copies. His bank acknowledges the request, but never sends any 1099s (or statements). His ex won’t give him the time of day. He assumes there aren’t any additional 1099s and files his return.

However, the IRS examines his return and finds the “missing” 1099s. He immediately pays the additional tax, but he’s also assessed an accuracy-related penalty because the amounts were large. He goes to Tax Court and challenges the penalty.

I don’t think it’s a close case. As the Court notes,

We note at the outset that we found petitioner to be a very conscientious taxpayer. In preparing to file his 2000 return, petitioner made concerted efforts to obtain any statements and Forms 1099 pertaining to the education accounts….Moreover, petitioner specifically requested that First Albany mail him copies of the Forms 1099 pertaining to the education accounts….Petitioner never received any Forms 1099 for 2000 from First Albany pertaining to the education accounts. It was not unreasonable for petitioner to assume that there were no Forms 1099 issued….

Upon a review of the record, we find that petitioner had reasonable cause to believe that there were no Forms 1099 pertaining to him, and that he acted in good faith with respect to the understatement attributable to the income reported on those forms.

One should note, though, that the Court notes, “Although this is a close case….” The taxpayer does all that he can do and it’s close? Just a reminder of where the bar is in Tax Court.

Cite: Monte v. Commissioner, 7388-04S

Posted in Tax Court | Comments Off on I Don’t Think It’s Close…

You Too Can Live Tax Free…

…in jail.

After having been gone for just under a week, I must thank Roth Tax Updates for the first of a few gems. It seems that Lynne Meredith received 121 months (10 years and a month) for conspiring to defraud the IRS. The Los Angeles Times details the story here (one-time registration required). In her book, How to Cook a Vulture, she stated that she could show people how to get the IRS to write you a letter that you didn’t have to pay taxes.

It didn’t work.

But Ms. Meredith won’t have to pay taxes in upcoming years. She’ll be making sub-minimum wage in a Federal penitentiary.

Posted in Tax Fraud | Comments Off on You Too Can Live Tax Free…

Arthur Andersen: Not Guilty (Yet)

Unless you’ve been hiding out, you’ve almost certainly heard the news that the US Supreme Court yesterday overturned the conviction of Arthur Andersen for destroying documents in the Enron fiasco. You can find news coverage here and here (one-time registration required). The opinion can be found here.

What does this mean? Arthur Andersen (the accounting firm) no longer exists; instead of a Big Five accounting firms we have a Big Four. Will Arthur Andersen rise from the dead? That’s just not going to happen. Will the US retry Andersen? I have no idea, but it’s irrelevant. Andersen is dead.

As the Wall Street Journal points out in an editorial today, going after the partners would have been a better idea. Most of the employees of Andersen had no idea of what was going on. Does anyone really believe that a tax partner in Seattle knew what the partners in Houston were doing? It was guilt by association. At least the US Justice Department has apparently learned from this. In recent white-collar cases, the Justice Department has gone after the principals.

Posted in Tax Evasion | 20 Comments