# UNITED STATES TAX COURT

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/agency%3Atax-court%3A61116bf7744ede41

## Record

- **Collection:** Agency decision
- **Document type:** Agency decision

## Text

ALS

T.C. Memo. 2013-69

UNITED STATES TAX COURT

TOMMY K. CRYER, Pe itioner v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent

Docket No. 8118-09.

Filed March 11, 2013.

Emile L. Hebert, III, for respondent.

MEMORANDUM 01 INION

GOEKE, Judge: After the filing of the pe ition herein Mr. Cryer died. No
substitution of any personal representative has bëen made. Consequently, when
the case was called for trial, no appearance was

ade for Mr. C er.

This case is before the Court for redetermination of the income tax liabilities
of Mr. Cryer for the tax years 1993 through 2001.

SERVED Mar 11 2013

-2[*2] From 1993 through 2001 the late Mr. Cryer operated a sole proprietorship
law practice but did not file Federal income tax returns. After an audit using a
bank deposits analysis, respondent determined Mr. Cryer had significant income
and was liable for various additions to tax for each of the years.1
After Mr. Cryer petitioned this Court, he met with respondent and the
parties agreed that significant reductions in the income tax and additions to tax
were in order which led to various concessions by respondent before trial.

1Respondent's notice of deficiency determinations were as follows:
Additions to tax

Year

Deficiency

Sec. 6651(f)

Sec. 6651(a)(2) Sec. 6654

1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001

$67,332
69,317
93,663
56,930
290,346
56,926
88,712
72,705
52,875

$48,815.70
50,254.83
. 67,905.68
41,274.25
210,500.85
41,271.35
64,316.20
52,711.13
38,334.58

$16,833.00
17,329.25
23,415.75
14,232.50
72,586.50
14,231.50
22,178.00
18,176.25
13,218.75

$2,821.17
3,571.36
5,113.22
3,030.12
15,641.09
2,583.77
4,260.61
3,910.42
2,113.08

-3[*3] I. Concessions
First, the only adjustment for the tax year 1993 was for Mr. Cryer's
unreported income from his law practice for that tax year, and that adjustment was
based upon a bank deposits analysis. However, when counsel for respondent
received the administrative file for this matter, it did not contain any bank
statements for that tax year. Counsel for respondent then determined that Mr.

Cryer's bank statements for the tax year 1993 weie no longer available.
Accordingly, respondent has conceded in full all djustments for the tax year
1993.
Second, the adjustments for Mr. Cryer's unreported income from his law
practice for each of the tax years 1994 through 2001 were also based upon a bank
deposits analysis. In the notices of deficiency, the amounts determined under the
bank deposits analysis were as follows:
1994

1995

1996

Net taxable deposits

$347,952

$456,935

$294,705

Less reported gross
receipts

-0-

-0-

-0-

347,952

295,134

294,705

Total unreported

gross receipts

-4[*4]
Net taxable
deposits

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

$1,357,713

$295,134

$409,006

$347,952

$456,935

-0-

-0-

-0-

-0-

-0-

1,357,713

295,134

409,006

347,952

456,935

Less reported
gross

receipts ,
Total
unreported ·
gross

receipts

Before he died Mr. Cryer and counsel for respondent reviewed the bank
deposits analysis and determined that some adjustments to that analysis were
warranted. After making those adjustments, the amounts determined under the

bank deposits analysis are as follows and are the amounts remaining at issue:

Net taxable
deposits
Less reported
gross

receipts

1994

1995

1996

1997 1

1998

$117,022.29

$141,768.28 ·

$117,405.30

$120,910.39

$106,802.44

-0-

-0 -

-0-

-0 -

-0 -

117,022.29

141,768.28

117,405.30

120,910.39

106,802.44 .

Total
unreported
gross

receipts

.- 5

[*5]
Net taxable
deposits
Less reported gross
receipts

-

1999

2000

2001

$104,394.53

$54,726.02

$87,123.89

-0-

-0-

-0-

104,394.53

54,726.02

87,123.89

-

Total unreported

gross receipts

The amounts respondent conceded for 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, and
1999 are all of the deposits to the Tommy K. Cryer, Attorney-at-Law, Trust
Accounts Mr. Cryer maintained during those tax years. The amounts respondent

conceded for 2000 and 2001 are (a) all of the deposits to the Tommy K. Cryer,
Attorney-at-Law, Trust Accounts Mr. Cryer maintained during those tax years,

and (b) all of the deposits to another of Mr. Cryer's bank accounts maintained
during those tax years.2
Third, on the basis of the payroll tax returns Mr. Cryer filed for his law
practice for the tax years 1994 through 2001 and information obtained from third
parties, he is entitled to the following deductions claimed on Schedule C, Profit or
Loss From Business:

2When respondent received the administrative file in this matter, it did not
contain any bank statements for that other account for 2000 or 2001, and
respondent determined that those bank statements were no longer available.

-6[*6]

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

Wages

$20,150

$21,025

$23,125

$23,125

$24,050

1,975

2,101

2,202

2,134

2,274

expenses

13,380

13,380

13,380

13,380

13,380

Allowable
Sch. C
expenses

35,505

36,506

38,707

38,639

39,704

-

Taxes &

licenses
Other

1999

2000

2001

$22,635

$21,275

$21,275

Taxes & licenses

2,166

2,062

2,062

Other expenses

13,380

13,380

13,380

Allowable Sch. C
expenses

38,181

36,717

36,717

Wages

II. Developments After Mr. Cryer's Death

On July 19, 2012, pleadings were filed opening the Successión of Tommy
K. Cryer in the First Judicial District Court, Parish of Caddo, State of Louisianá
(docket No. 560863-B). In those proceedings, the court denied probate of a
purported will of Mr. Cryer. The State court has yet to appoint anyone as
the executor, the administrator, or the independent administrator of the
succession, nor has it appointed anyone to act as curator for any missing heir(s).

-7-

[*7] There is no party remaining to litigate this case for Mr. Cryer; but because

of the complexity of the case and respondent's concessions, the Court determined
that respondent must present evidence to sustain the additions to tax.
Background

Decedent, Mr. Cryer, was a resident of Louisiana when he filed the petition.
During the tax years 1993 through 2001 Mr. Cryer operated a sole
proprietorship law office but did not file a Federal income tax return for any of

those years. On January 10, 2001, respondent's revenue agent sent a letter to Mr.
Cryer regarding his tax years 1993 through 1999. Attached to that letter was a
request for documents for the tax years 1993 through1999, including: (a) general
ledgers for his businesses; (b) records detailing asset sale(s) in those tax years; (c)
all business bank account information including statements, deposit slips, and
returned checks for those tax years; (d) verification of all business expenses for
those tax years; (e) copies of all filed payroll returns for those tax years; and (f) all
personal bank statements for those tax years. Mr. Cryer never produced any of the
requested records.
Mr. Cryer failed to maintain, and during the audit for his tax years 1993 .
through 2001 failed to submit for examination by respondent, complete and
accurate books and records of his income-producing activities for those tax years.

-8[*8] As a result of Mr. Cryer's failure to maintain complete and accurate records
of his income-producing activities and his failure to produce complete and

,

accurate records to respondent in connection with the examination of his tax years

1994 through 2001, respondent could not determine from Mr. Cryer's records the
amount of his gross receipts from his sole proprietorship law practice for the tax
years 1993 through 2001. Thus, respondent determined Mr. Cryer's gross receipts
from his sole proprietorship for those tax years through the use of the bank
deposits method. The revenue agents who conducted the audit for Mr. Cryer's tax
years 1993 through 2001 analyzed Mr. Cryer's bank records for those tax years to
determine the gross receipts for his sole proprietorship law practice during the tax
years 1993 through 2001. In making that analysis, the revenue agents reviewed
Mr. Cryer's bank records to determine whether any of the deposits thereto
included nontaxable items such as loans and interaccount transfers.
Mr. Cryer was married to Carolyn F. Cryer in Louisiana during all of the tax
years 1994 through 1998 and during the tax year 1999 until Ms. Cryer died in
March 1999. Louisiana is a community property State, and respondent's
calculations reflect only Mr. Cryer's share of the community income while he was
married.

-9[*9] On the basis of payments reported by third parties, respondent determined
that Mr. Cryer received $3,000 of nonemployee compensation in 1995 and $367 of
capital gains in 1998, one-half of each being unreported income of Mr. Cryer for
the respective tax years. Additionally, on the basis of the payments reported by -·
third parties, respondent determined that Mr. Cryer's unreported interest income is
as follows:

Year

Total unreported
interest income

1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001

$140
315
42
182
57
138
91
79

Unreported interest
Mr. Cryer's
income reportable by unreported interest
Mr. Crver's spouse
income

$70
157
21
91
28
69
-0-Ø-

$70
158
21
91
29
69
91
79

Mr. Cryer's unreported royalty income is as follows:

Year

1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001

Unreporteil royalty
Total unreported royalty income reportable by Mr. Cryer's unreported
income
Mr. Cryer's spouse
royalty income

$106
71
141
30
85
384
253

$53
35
70 |
15 1
42
-0-0-

$53
36
71
15
43
384
253

- 10 [*10]

Discussion

I. Addition to Tax for Fraudulent Failure To File

.

Under Rule 142(b),3 the Commissioner bears the burden of proving fraud by

the taxpayer. The Commissioner's burden of proving that an addition to tax under
section 6651(f) for fraudulent failure to file a tax return is appropriate may be met
by evidence of (1) an underpayment of income tax (a deficiency); (2) the intent of
the taxpayer to evade taxes known or believed to be owing; and (3) a failure to file
a required return, unless due to reasonable cause. Sec. 7454 (a); Rule 142(b);

Considine v. United States, 683 F.2d 1285, 1286 (9th Cir. 1982); Dunlap v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-187; Schmitz v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.

1983-482.
During the tax years 1994 through 2001 Mr. Cryer operated a sole
proprietorship law practice and also received nonemployee compensation, gains .
derived from dealing in property, interest, and royalties. Mr. Cryer did not file a
Federal income tax return for any of the tax years 1994 through 2001 and did not
report any of the income he received during those tax years.

3All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure,
and all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code (Code) in effect for the
years m issue.

- 11 [*11] Mr. Cryer failed to maintain and to submit for examination by respondent
complete and accurate books and records of his income-producing activities for
those years. As a result, respondent used a bank deposits analysis.
The presence or absence of fraud is never presumed but is a question of fact
that must be established by affirmative evidence. Gajewski v. Commissioner, 67

T.C. 181, 199 (1976), aff'd without published opinion, 578 F.2d 1383 (8th Cir.
1978); Beaver v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 85, 92 (1970). Respondent may prove
Mr. Cryer's fraudulent intent by presenting affirmative proof that he intended to
evade taxes that he knew or believed that he owed, by conduct intended to
conceal, mislead, or otherwise prevent the collection of such taxes. See Webb v.

Commissioner, 394 F.2d 366 (5th Cir. 1968), aff'è T.C. Mémo. 1966-81; Rowlee
v. Commissioner, 80 T.C. 1111, 1123 (1983). Respondent may also prove Mr.
Cryer's fraudulent intent by means of circumstantial evidence where direct
evidence is unavailable. See Stone v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 213, 223-224

(1971); Otsuki v. Commissioner, 53 T.C. 96, 105 106 (1969).
Mr. Cryer failed to report the following amounts of taxable income he
received during the tax years 1994 through 2001:

- 12 [*12]

1994

$40,828.65

1995

54,395.14

. 1996

39,406.15

1997

41,297.70

1998

33,777.22

1999

33,218.77

2000

18,483.02

2001

50,738.89

The substantial amounts of taxable income Mr. Cryer failed to report for the tax

years at issue are evidence of his fraudulent intent for those tax years. See Ballard
v. Commissioner, 740 F.2d 659 (8th Cir. 1984), aff's in part, rev'g in part T.C.

Memo. 1982-466; Marcus v. Commissioner, 70 T.C. 562 (1978), aff'd without

published opinion, 621 F.2d 439 (5th Cir. 1980); United States v. Diehl, 460 F.
Supp. 1282 (S.D. Tex. 1978), aff'd, 586 F.2d 1080 (5th Cir. 1978).
Furthermore, in the fall of 2003 Mr. Cryer submitted income tax returns for

1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997 to the State of Louisiana listing the amounts of

$34,310, $25,793, $43,718, and $59,877, for the years 1994, 1995, 1996, and
1997, respectively, on line 7 (Federal adjusted gross income) of the Louisiana
individual State income tax returns for those years. Attached to each of those

- 13 [*13] returns was a statement in which Mr. Cryer wrote he "entered the total of all
income received during the tax year".
La. Rev. Stat. Ann. sec. 47:42A (2001), wlÅich was in effect during the tax
years 1994 through 2001, provided that "Gross income includes gains, profits, and
income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service * * * or
from professions, vocations, trades, businesses * * *[and] from interest * * * or
the transaction of any business carried on for gain or profit". La. Rev. Stat. Ann.
sec. 47:161A (2001), which was also in effect during the tax years 1994 through
2001, provided that "[i]n the case of a resident individual, items of gross income
* * * from whatever source received * * * shall be included in the taxpayer's
return and the amount of the tax shall be compute¿l upon the entire income from
whatever source derived". Mr. Cryer's Louisiana income tax returns for 1994,
1995, 1996, and 1997 are admissions that he knew that the income he received
during those tax years was taxable as gross income under the laws of the State of
Louisiana.
Those Louisiana income tax statutes are similar to the Code, which provides
that gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including

compensation for services'(including fees) and gross income derived from
business. Sec. 61(a)(1) and (2). Accordingly, Mr! Cryer, who was.a practicing

- 14 [*14] attorney in Louisiana during those tax years, knew or should have known
that the income he received at least during the years 1994-97 was taxable as gross
income under the Code.

Nevertheless, in the statements attached to his Louisiana income tax returns
for tax years 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997 Mr. Cryer alleges that none of the
income he reported on those tax returns "can be regarded as 'Federal Adjusted
Gross Income'." In those statements Mr. Cryer also alleged that he "did not have

any taxable items of income from a taxable source (Federal gross income and
Federal gross adjusted income) as defined by the provisions of the Code (title 26,
United States Code), and the Code of Federal Regulations during the year" of that
return. Furthermore, in his January 26, 2001, letter in response to the revenue
agent's Jamiary 10, 2001, letter requesting that he produce certain documents, Mr.
Cryer wrote: "I have no records of having any taxable items of gross income from

a taxable source for the years listed in your letter, 1993-1999."
In essence, Mr. Cryer claimed that the income he received during the tax
years at issue from certain "sources" was taxable under Louisiana law, but not

under Federal law. In United States v. Clayton, 506 F.3d 405, 412 (5th Cir. 2007),
the Court to which an appeal would lie in this case, cited and followed its prior
unpublished opinion holding that "the argument that income derived from sources

- 15 [*15) within the United States" is not taxable under Federal law is "patently
frivolous" and "absurd".
In his January 26, 2001, letter Mr. Cryer also wrote: "I note that none of the

enclosures, some of which request information and/or documentation, have OMB
control numbers, indicating to me that they are not official requests requiring a

response." In Lonsdale v. United States, 919 F.2d 1440, 1445 (10th Cir. 1990),
the court held that "the Paperwork Reduction Act is inapplicable to 'information
collection request' forms issued during an investigation against an individual to
determine his or her tax liability." See also 44 U.S.C. sec. 3518(c)(1)(B)(ii)

(2002).
Mr. Cryer's allegations that (a) income of a U.S. citizen earned in and while
a resident of a State is not taxable under the Code and (b) that documents issued
by the Internal Revenue Service without OMB numbers are invalid have
repeatedly been rejected by this Court as well as other Federal courts. United

States v. Bell, 414 F.3d 474, 475-476 (3d Cir. 2005); United.States v. Hicks, 947
F.2d 1356, 1359 (9th Cir. 1991); Williams v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 136, 138139 (2000); McDougall v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-683, aff'd without
published opinion, 15 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 1993).

- 16 [*16] Additional evidence of the fact that Mr. Cryer had but failed to report
taxable income during at least some of the tax years at issue is found in two loan
applications he submitted to banks. In a loan application Mr. Cryer signed on

April 28, 1995, and gave to Minden Bank & Trust Co., he listed $50,000-$75,000
per year in the block entitled "Your Present Gross Salary or Commission".
Similarly, in a loan application date stamped January 18, 2001, that Mr. Cryer
gave to Regions Bank, he listed $6,000 in the field entitled "Gross Monthly
Income" and $1,500 in the field entitled "Other Monthly Income".
The facts supporting respondent's determination that Mr. Cryer fraudulently
and with intent to evade taxes failed to file Federal income tax returns reporting
his taxable income and income tax liabilities for the tax years 1994 through 2001
inólude but are not limited to the following:
(1) Mr. Cryer's awareness of requirements under the
Internal Revenue Code for filing returns as evidenced by
the Federal payroll tax returns he filed for liis law
practice during each of the tax years 1994 through 2001;
(2) Mr. Cryer's failure to file a Federal income tax return
for any of the tax years 1994 through 2001;

- 17 [*17]

(3) Mr. Cryer's failure to maintain and submit to

respondent complete and accurate records of his sole
proprietorship law practice for 1994 through 2001;
(4) Mr. Cryer's failure to report any of his gross receipts
from his sole proprietorship law pra tice;
(5) Mr. Cryer's failure to report any of the other income

he received;
(6) Mr. Cryer's admissions on his Louisiana income tax
returns that he received income that was taxable under
Louisiana law during the tax years at issue;
(7) Mr. Cryer's acknowledgments on loan applications .
that he submitted to banks that he had taxable income
During some of the years at issue; and
(8) Mr. Cryer's eight-year pattern of such activity.
These facts, taken together, satisfy respondent's burden of proving fraudulent
intent and establish that Mr. Cryer is liable for additions to tax under section

6651(f) for the tax years 1994 through 2001.

- 18 [*18] II. Additions to Tax for Failure To Timely Pay Tax
Because Mr. Cryer did not file Federal income tax returns for 1994 through
2001, respondent prepared substitutes for returns. See sec. 6020(b). Additionally,
Mr. Cryer has never made any payments for his Federal income tax for any of the
years. See, e.g., Asbury v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2011-107.

Section 6651(a)(2) provides that if a taxpayer fails to pay taxes, unless the
failure is due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect, there shall be
added to the amount required to be shown as tax on the return an,amount equal to
0.5% for each month during which the taxpayer continues to fail to pay such taxes,
not exceeding 25% in the aggregate. The record shows no basis to f'md reasonable
cause. Accordingly, imposition of the additions to tax under section 6651(a)(2) for
1994 through 2001 is justified. See Pryor v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-287.
III. Additions to Tax Under Section 6654 for Failure To Make the Required
Estimated Tax Payments
Section 6654(a) provides that if a taxpayer underpays estimated taxes, there
shall be added to the tax an amount determined at the annual rate established under
section 6621 on the amount of the underpayment for the period of said
underpayment. In this case, despite receiving gross receipts from his sole

- 19 [*19] proprietorship law practice, nonemployee compensation capital gains,
interest income, and royalties during 1994 through 2001, Mr. Cryer made no
estimated tax payments for any of those years. Accordingly, the imposition of the
additions to tax for Mr. Cryer's failure to pay his estimated tax for the years 1994
through 2001 is justified. See Ballmer v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-295;
Horner v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-447.
To reflect the foregoing and concessions bylrespondent,
Decision will be entered

under Rule 155.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/agency%3Atax-court%3A61116bf7744ede41. Public record. Not legal advice.
