                        T.C. Memo. 2005-122



                      UNITED STATES TAX COURT



             ROBERT EUGENE POINDEXTER, Petitioner v.
          COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent



     Docket No. 8756-03.             Filed May 25, 2005.


     Robert Eugene Poindexter, pro se.

     Marie Small, for respondent.



                        MEMORANDUM OPINION


     GOEKE, Judge:   Respondent determined a deficiency in

petitioner’s income tax of $2,286 for the taxable year 2000 and

additions to tax pursuant to section 6651(a)(1) and (2) of

$514.35 and $217.17, respectively, and pursuant to section
                               - 2 -

6654(a) of $122.93.1   After a concession,2 the sole issue

remaining before the Court is petitioner’s claim that the notice

of deficiency for the taxable year 2000 received from respondent

is invalid because of the inclusion of royalty income from Warner

Chappell Music, Inc. (Warner Chappell).   Petitioner asserts that

the Form 1099-MISC from Warner Chappell is invalid because he was

not paid the full royalties owed in the year at issue and for

prior years by Warner Chappell.   Petitioner makes this argument

despite having stipulated that he is required under section 61 to

include in his gross income, royalties of $16,113 paid to him by

Warner Chappell in 2000.   We hold that the notice of deficiency

issued to petitioner for the 2000 tax year is valid because

petitioner has not offered a basis to find error in respondent’s

determinations nor any evidence of error.

                            Background

     The pertinent facts have been stipulated and are so found.

The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are



     1
      Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to
the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue, and
all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and
Procedure.
     2
      By answer, respondent conceded the sec. 6651(a)(2) addition
to tax. Respondent alleges that on account of this concession of
the addition to tax under sec. 6651(a)(2), the addition to tax
under sec. 6651(a)(1) should be increased in the amount of .05
percent per month for the first 5 months ($57.15) for a total
addition to tax under sec. 6651(a)(1) of $571.50. See sec.
6651(c)(1).
                               - 3 -

incorporated herein by this reference.   In addition, petitioner

offered oral testimony and other separate exhibits which are

irrelevant to the question of whether respondent’s determinations

should be sustained.

     At the time the petition was filed, petitioner resided in

Jamaica, New York.

     Petitioner failed to file a Federal income tax return for

the tax year 2000.   As a result, respondent issued to petitioner

the notice of deficiency for the tax year 2000 upon which this

case is based.   Nevertheless, the parties have stipulated that

petitioner was required to report gross income for the year 2000,

under section 61, in the form of royalties from the sources and

in the amounts that follow:

          Source                         Amount

     Broadcast Music, Inc.               $3,385
     Warner Music Group                   2,219
     Thump Records, Inc.                    407
     Warner Chappell, Inc.               16,113

In addition, the parties have stipulated that the additions to

tax under sections 6651(a)(1) and 6654(a) are applicable to

petitioner’s 2000 tax liability.

     Petitioner believes that the Form 1099 he received from

Warner Chappell for the year 2000 is false and fraudulent and

that he should have received royalties in excess of the $16,113
                               - 4 -

he was paid by Warner Chappell for that year.   Nonetheless, he

stipulates that he did receive the $16,113.

                             Discussion

     Petitioner’s position in this case is based upon the

erroneous impression that he should not have to pay income tax on

his 2000 royalty income until respondent forces Warner Chappell

to admit petitioner is owed additional royalties for that year or

at least until respondent investigates Warner Chappell.

Petitioner is misinformed as to respondent’s obligation and as to

the authority of this Court.   As the Court attempted to explain

to petitioner at trial, this case is solely about determining his

correct tax liability for the year 2000 since the additions to

tax have been resolved.   Petitioner’s claim for increased

royalties from Warner Chappell has no bearing on the matters

before this Court.   As in a prior case before this Court,

petitioner has not offered any evidence on the matter that we can

properly adjudicate.   See Poindexter v. Commissioner, 122 T.C.

280 (2004).

     Accordingly, with the exception of respondent’s concession

of the addition to tax under section 6651(a)(2), respondent’s

position is sustained, and



                               An appropriate decision will

                          be entered.
