Opinion
12985-23SL
02-13-2024
HAROLD E. LUCAS, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge
On September 26, 2023, respondent filed a Motion to Remove Small Tax Case Designation. In that motion, respondent asserts that the total unpaid tax on the date of determination with respect to the tax periods set forth in the notice of determination exceeded $50,000 and, therefore, this collection due process (CDP) case does not qualify for treatment as a small tax case. On October 18, 2023, petitioner filed a Response to Motion to Remove Small Tax Case Designation and, thereafter, respondent filed a Reply to Response to Motion to Remove Small Tax Case Designation
Petitioner objects to the granting of respondent's motion, arguing that because of payments made and the submission of an amended tax return for one of the tax years at issue after the notice of determination was issued, the present total unpaid tax does not exceed $50,000. However, the $50,000 limit under Internal Revenue Code §7463(f)(2) refers to the total unpaid tax as of the date of the determination. Leahy v. Commissioner, 129 T.C. 71, 76 (2007); Schwartz v. Commissioner, 128 T.C. 6, 12 (2007). The term "tax" includes interest and penalties. Schwartz, 128 T.C. at n.l. Here, petitioner's total unpaid tax on the date of determination exceeded $50,000.
Upon due consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Remove Small Tax Case Designation is granted in that the docket number of this case is amended by deleting the letter "S" and the Clerk of the Court is hereafter directed to process this case to trial or other disposition as a regular tax case. It is further
ORDERED that, to the extent petitioner in his above-referenced Response requests that certain exhibits attached to respondent's Motion to Remove Small Tax Case Designation be stricken, petitioner's request is denied.