by Barry C Picker, CPA/PFS, CFP
When an individual who clearly has a losing argument on the taxability of his retirement plan distribution goes to Tax Court anyway, maybe it’s because he doesn’t fully understand the law.
However, when he loses in Tax Court, appeals to the Court of Appeals and loses there, and then files an appeal with the Supreme Court (they refused the case), do you admire his perseverance or wonder at his stubbornness?
His basic argument was that he needed the money, spent it on food, auto insurance, clothing and the like, and therefore he shouldn’t pay tax on the distribution. Clearly a non starter, but that didn’t stop him from trying to take his case all the way to the Supreme Court.
In a way, I do feel for the guy, which is why I’m not mentioning the case cite. And he’s far from the only person who’s gone to Tax Court with arguments that have absolutely no chance of winning.
On the plus side, if it wasn’t for these pro se taxpayers (they argue the case themselves, probably because no attorney admitted to Tax Court would make these arguments), I’d lose a lot of the jokes in my presentations.
