                        T.C. Memo. 2000-126



                      UNITED STATES TAX COURT



               DANIEL FRANKLIN HAINES, Petitioner v.
           COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent



     Docket No. 4571-97.                 Filed April 10, 2000.



     Daniel Franklin Haines, pro se.

     Lisa M. Oshiro, for respondent.



             MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION


     RUWE, Judge:   Respondent determined deficiencies in

petitioner’s Federal income taxes and additions to tax as

follows:
                              - 2 -


                                    Additions to tax
     Year      Deficiency     Sec. 6651(a)(1)     Sec. 6654
     1992       $53,380            $2,757            $275
     1993        64,534             4,976             626
     1994        64,065             4,727             715
     1995        55,566             4,567             772

     The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner is

subject to Federal income tax on wage income from United

Airlines; (2) whether petitioner is liable for additions to tax

for failing to timely file Federal income tax returns and for

failing to pay estimated taxes; and (3) whether a penalty should

be awarded to the United States under section 6673.1

                        FINDINGS OF FACT

     Some of the facts have been deemed stipulated2 and are so

found.


     1
      Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to
the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the years at issue, and
all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and
Procedure.
     2
      The parties did not have a signed stipulation of facts at
trial. Respondent’s proposed stipulation of facts contained
facts such as petitioner’s address, copies of unsigned Forms
1040, with attached Forms W-2 from United Airlines, Inc., that
petitioner submitted to respondent for the years at issue, and
that showed petitioner’s wages from United Airlines during the
relevant years. Some of the facts were previously admitted in
response to respondent’s request for admissions.

     At trial, petitioner asserted that the Forms 1040 were
irrelevant and then invoked his Fifth Amendment rights about each
proposed finding of fact. Based on our review of the entire
record, including petitioner’s various filings, we found that
there was no legitimate dispute concerning the facts stated in
the proposed stipulation of facts, and we granted respondent’s
motion to compel stipulation under Rule 91(f).
                              - 3 -

The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are

incorporated herein by this reference.    Petitioner resided in

Spanaway, Washington, at the time he filed his petition.

     During the years 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995, petitioner was

employed by United Airlines as a pilot.       United Airlines paid

petitioner the following wages:

                    Year              Wages

                    1992          $186,885.16
                    1993           195,700.03
                    1994           194,874.57
                    1995           174,289.54

     Petitioner did not file timely Federal income tax returns

for the tax years 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995.       Petitioner

submitted unsigned Forms 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return,

with attached Forms W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, to respondent.

The Forms 1040 each showed that they were received by

respondent’s Ogden Service Center on October 21, 1997.       The

attached Forms W-2, from United Airlines, Inc., revealed wages

for each of the years in issue in the amounts stated above.        The

Forms 1040 reported no income in the space provided.       Attached to

the Forms 1040 were statements generally denying that petitioner

was a taxpayer and asserting that there was no statutory

authority upon which he could be taxed.       The notice of deficiency

for the years in issue was mailed to petitioner on December 10,

1996.
                                - 4 -

                               OPINION

     On brief petitioner argues that:    (1) Respondent has no

jurisdiction over him in this matter, and therefore, the notice

of deficiency is void; (2) this Court lacks subject matter

jurisdiction; and (3) petitioner is not a “person” or

“individual” as those terms are defined and applied in title 26.

     Petitioner’s arguments are reminiscent of tax-protester

rhetoric that has been universally rejected by this and other

courts.   We shall not painstakingly address petitioner's

assertions "with somber reasoning and copious citation of

precedent; to do so might suggest that these arguments have some

colorable merit."   Williams v. Commissioner, 114 T.C.       ,

(2000) (slip op. at 5) (quoting Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d

1417, 1417 (5th Cir. 1984)).   Accordingly, we hold that

petitioner is liable for the deficiency determined by respondent.

     Respondent determined that petitioner is liable for an

addition to tax pursuant to section 6651(a)(1).    Section

6651(a)(1) provides an addition to tax for failure to timely file

a return.   The addition to tax is equal to 5 percent of the

amount required to be shown as tax on the return, with an

additional 5 percent for each additional month or fraction

thereof during which such failure continues, not exceeding 25

percent in the aggregate.   A taxpayer may avoid the addition to

tax by establishing that the failure to file a timely return was
                               - 5 -

due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect.    See Rule

142(a); United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S. 241, 245-246 (1985).

     The Forms 1040 that petitioner submitted for the years in

issue were unsigned, undated, and stamped received by

respondent’s Ogden Service Center on October 21, 1997, long after

the due dates for filing returns for the years in issue.     The

only information petitioner provided on the Forms 1040 was his

name, a mailing address, and his Social Security number.     Where

other information was required, petitioner simply wrote “not

required”.   To each Form 1040, petitioner attached a Form W-2, as

provided by United Airlines.   Petitioner also attached to each

Form 1040 a typed explanation as to why he “intentionally omitted

non-required information from [his] [F]orm 1040.”

     Respondent also determined that petitioner is liable for

additions to tax pursuant to section 6654.   Section 6654 provides

an addition to tax for failure to pay estimated taxes.    Unless

petitioner demonstrates that one of the statutory exceptions

applies, imposition of this addition to tax is mandatory where

prepayments of tax, either through withholding or by making

estimated quarterly tax payments during the course of the taxable

year, do not equal the percentage of total liability required

under the statute.   See sec. 6654(a); Niedringhaus v.

Commissioner, 99 T.C. 202, 222 (1992).   Petitioner bears the

burden of proving his entitlement to any exception.    See
                                - 6 -

Habersham-Bey v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 304, 319-320 (1982).

Petitioner failed to do so.    We hold that petitioner is liable

for additions to tax under section 6654(a).

     Respondent moved for a penalty under section 6673.    Under

section 6673, this Court may award a penalty to the United States

of up to $25,000 when the proceeding has been instituted or

maintained by the taxpayer primarily for delay or if the

taxpayer's position in such proceeding is frivolous or

groundless.   See sec. 6673.   Based on the record, we conclude

that such an award is appropriate in this case.

     Petitioner has pursued a frivolous and groundless position

throughout this proceeding, and he has refused to cooperate in

the discovery and stipulation process.    Petitioner had previously

made frivolous and groundless arguments in the U.S. Bankruptcy

Court for the Western District of Washington (Bankruptcy Court)

prior to our proceeding.    The Bankruptcy Court clearly informed

petitioner that he is a taxpayer and that he is required to file

valid income tax returns.   Petitioner has wasted the time and

resources of two courts.

     Petitioner knew or should have known that his position was

groundless and frivolous, yet he persisted in maintaining this

proceeding primarily to impede the proper workings of our

judicial system and to delay the payment of his Federal income
                               - 7 -

tax liabilities.   Accordingly, a penalty is awarded to the United

States under section 6673 in the amount of $25,000.


                               An appropriate order and decision

                          will be entered granting respondent’s

                          motion for a penalty, and decision

                          will be entered for respondent.
