                        T.C. Memo. 2011-53



                      UNITED STATES TAX COURT



              BETTY JEAN STEINSHOUER, Petitioner v.
          COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent



     Docket No. 3791-09.                  Filed March 2, 2011.



     Betty Jean Steinshouer, pro se.

     Randall B. Childs, for respondent.



                        MEMORANDUM OPINION


     GOEKE, Judge:   Ms. Steinshouer did not file Federal income

tax returns for 2004 and 2006.   Respondent determined income tax

deficiencies and additions to tax pursuant to section 6651(a)(1)

and (2)1 for 2004 and 2006 and under section 6654(a) for 2006


     1
      All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code,
                                                   (continued...)
                                - 2 -

only.    Respondent had previously prepared substitutes for returns

pursuant to section 6020(b).   Ms. Steinshouer, in a response to

respondent’s pretrial memorandum, did not contest the income

determinations.   Rather, she asserted that she is entitled to

deduct additional expenses for her business.   Ms. Steinshouer

executed a stipulation of facts but failed to appear at trial.

On the basis of the stipulated facts, we uphold respondent’s

determinations.

                             Background

     Ms. Steinshouer resided in Florida at the time she filed her

petition.

     In 2004 Ms. Steinshouer received compensation of $18,350 and

$600 from Florida Humanities Council and Broward Public Library

Foundation, respectively.   She also received $15 in interest

income from Cornerstone Community Bank in 2004.   In 2006 Ms.

Steinshouer received compensation of $27,000, $1,000, and $1,500

from Florida Humanities Council, Town of South Berwick, and

Villages Charter School, Inc., respectively.   Ms. Steinshouer was

not an employee of any of these named entities.

     Ms. Steinshouer made estimated tax payments in April 2005

and April 2007 for years 2004 and 2006, respectively, but her

2006 payment was not sufficient to avoid the application of the


     1
      (...continued)
and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice
and Procedure.
                                 - 3 -

section 6654 addition to tax for failure to make estimated tax

payment.   She failed to make any other payments for these years,

and as stated previously, she did not file Federal income tax

returns.

     Respondent’s determinations were as follows:

                                   Additions to Tax
   Year     Deficiency     Sec. 6651(a)(1) Sec. 6651(a)(2)   Sec. 6654

   2004        $3,771          $763.87         $695.97          -0-
   2006         6,634         1,398.60          528.36        $291.92

     Ms. Steinshouer filed a timely petition covering both years.

                              Discussion

     Pursuant to section 6020(b), the Commissioner is authorized

to prepare a substitute for return for a taxpayer who does not

file a return.    Such returns for 2004 and 2006 resulted in

respondent’s deficiency determinations, upon which this

proceeding is based.     Respondent’s determination of these

deficiencies is entitled to a presumption of correctness.       See

Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111 (1933).     Ms. Steinshouer bears

the burden of proving respondent’s determination erroneous.       See

Rule 142(a).    Furthermore, section 6001 and the regulations

thereunder require the taxpayer to maintain adequate records,

submit returns, and furnish information as the Internal Revenue

Service may prescribe.

     Section 61 provides that gross income includes all income

from whatever source derived, unless the taxpayer can establish a
                                - 4 -

specific legislative authorization to exclude income from

taxation.    Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426, 429-

430 (1955).

       Regarding alleged deductions for business expenses, Ms.

Steinshouer has the burden of proving the expenditures and that

any such expenses are ordinary and necessary.    See sec. 162(a);

Rule 142(a)(1).    Ms. Steinshouer failed to produce any evidence

of expenses or appear at trial and testify.

       Respondent has carried the burden of producing evidence, as

imposed on him by section 7491(c), that the additions to tax

under section 6651(a)(1) and (2) apply for both 2004 and 2006,

because of Ms. Steinshouer’s failure to timely file and to timely

pay tax and respondent’s preparation of substitutes for returns.

Ms. Steinshouer did not establish that her failure to timely file

or to timely pay tax was due to reasonable cause and not willful

neglect.    Respondent has asserted that Ms. Steinshouer failed to

file a Federal income tax return for 2005 and that Ms.

Steinshouer is therefore subject to the section 6654 addition to

tax.    Ms. Steinshouer has not contested this assertion, and we

accept that respondent has carried the burden of production

regarding the addition to tax under section 6654 for 2006.

Therefore, the addition to tax under section 6654 for 2006 is

appropriate.    Accordingly, the Court sustains respondent’s

determinations.
                            - 5 -

To reflect the foregoing,


                                    Decision will be entered

                            for respondent.
