                        T.C. Memo. 1997-481



                      UNITED STATES TAX COURT



               JORGE ZAMORA-QUEZADA, Petitioner v.
          COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent



     Docket No. 5194-95.               Filed October 27, 1997.



     Jorge Zamora-Quezada, pro se.

     David B. Mora, for respondent.


                        MEMORANDUM OPINION


     LARO, Judge:   Jorge Zamora-Quezada petitioned the Court to

redetermine respondent's determinations with respect to his 1988

through 1992 taxable years.   Respondent determined the following

deficiencies and additions thereto:
                                - 2 -

                                    Additions to Tax
Year        Deficiency         Sec. 6651(a)    Sec. 6654
1988         $56,124              $13,966        $3,590
1989          33,575                8,394         2,270
1990          40,531               10,133         2,667
1991         100,185               25,046         2,589
1992          77,245               19,288         3,365

       Following petitioner's concession that he is liable for the

deficiencies determined by respondent, we must decide whether he is

liable for the additions to tax as well.    We hold he is.   Unless

otherwise noted, section references are to the Internal Revenue

Code in effect for the years in issue.     Rule references are to the

Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

                              Background

       Petitioner resided in Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico, when he

petitioned the Court.

       Petitioner was in the United States on a student visa for

approximately the 5-year period prior to 1988.    During this period,

he performed personal services in the United States as an employee,

and Federal taxes were withheld from the corresponding paychecks

that he received.    His visa expired in 1988, and he continued to

work and live in the United States from 1988 through 1992 without

official residency status.

       Petitioner earned income in the United States during each of

the years from 1988 through 1992 performing services as a physician

on an independent contractor basis.     He worked in various medical

facilities, most of which were located in or near Boston,

Massachusetts.    Many of these facilities issued petitioner a Form
                                 - 3 -

1099-MISC, Miscellaneous Income, listing the amount of income that

the issuer paid to him during the related year.   The First National

Bank of Boston also issued him a statement showing that it paid him

$2,742 of interest income during 1989.

     Petitioner did not file a Federal income tax return for any of

the subject years.

                              Discussion

     Petitioner must prove respondent's determinations wrong in

order to prevail.    Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111,

115 (1933).   Respondent determined that petitioner was liable for

an addition to tax under section 6651(a) for each year in issue,

because petitioner failed to file Federal income tax returns.   In

order to avoid this addition to tax, petitioner must prove that his

failure to file was:   (1) Due to reasonable cause, and (2) not due

to willful neglect.    Sec. 6651(a); Rule 142(a); United States v.

Boyle, 469 U.S. 241, 245 (1985).    Failure to file timely Federal

income tax return is due to reasonable cause if the taxpayer

exercised ordinary business care and prudence, and, nevertheless,

was unable to file the return within the prescribed time.   Sec.

301.6651-1(c)(1), Proced. & Admin. Regs.   Willful neglect means a

conscious, intentional failure or reckless indifference.    United

States v. Boyle, supra at 245.

     Petitioner claims that he did not believe that he had to file

Federal income tax returns for the subject years because he worked

and lived in the United States as an illegal alien.   We are
                                 - 4 -

unpersuaded by this claim.   It is clear that the Federal income tax

reaches income that is earned in the United States by an alien even

if deemed a nonresident.   See secs. 61, 872, 7701(b); see also

secs. 861(a)(1) and (3), 864(b).

     Respondent also determined an addition to tax under section

6654 for each year in issue, asserting that petitioner failed to

pay estimated tax.   This addition to tax is mandatory unless

petitioner proves he met one of the exceptions contained in section

6654.   Recklitis v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 874, 913 (1988).

Petitioner has failed to do so.    Accordingly, we sustain

respondent's determinations under section 6654.

     To reflect the foregoing,

                                         Decision will be entered for

                                 respondent.
