§6065 — Verification of returns

6065 requires returns and certain other documents to contain or be verified by a written declaration that they are made under the penalties ofperjury.

Section 6065 requires a return to be verified by a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury.

Section 6065 requires returns to contain or be verified by a written declaration that they are made under the penalties of perjury.

Under these circumstances we cannot say that the provisions of section 1.6012-1(a)(5), Income Tax Regs., are arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to the statutory provisions, and we hold that the regulation is valid.

notice of lien and the purported assessments and alleged tax liabilities are not based on filed income tax returns or competent evidence. Further, said notice of lien is - 4 - deficient on it’s [sic] face because it is not in compliance with 26 USC section 6065. A face-to-face meeting was held between petitioners and an Appeals officer on August 22, 2001. On November 5, 2001, the Appeals officer issued a Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, wher

t that the notice of deficiency: (a) Was signed by the District Director and not an Appeals officer, (b) was not signed in pen and ink but with a rubber stamp, and (c) was not signed under penalty of perjury, which petitioners contend is required by section 6065. They argue that the notice of deficiency is therefore invalid. We disagree. 13 Respondent need not sign the notice of deficiency to validate it. Sec. 6212; Fox v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993- 277, affd. without published opinion 69 F.

use such returns are not authorized by law nor are they affirmed under penalties of perjury." Similarly, petitioners argue that respondent's agent violated the law "by failing to provide a lawful signature on his information reports" as required by section 6065. Petitioners charge that, by completing the statements of income tax examination changes that are attached to the notices of deficiency and by filing those statements as "substitute returns" for petitioners under section 6020(b), responde

isagree with the examination report in all aspects, and will not accept it as an [sic] lawful official documents. If the examiners report is a lawful official document, then the examiner failed to sign the report under penalty of perjury, as per IRC Section 6065. * * * * * * * Where is the taxing statute that congress mandates you identify as to any tax liability that we may have? OPINION By notice of deficiency dated March 19, 2001, respondent determined that the trusts were shams and should be

Section 6065 specifically requires that a return "shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury ." See also sec . 1 .6065-1(a), Income Tax Regs . Even those Forms 1040 submitted to the IRS in which the verification language has been obliterated do not constitute valid returns . Ledbetter v . Co

97. With respect to petitioner’s document for 1996, respondent’s explanation as to why respondent did not file that document as petitioner’s tax return for 1996 is that petitioner did not sign that document under penalties of perjury, as required by section 6065. We agree with respondent’s decision not to file peti- tioner’s document for 1996 as his tax return for that year. Although petitioner claims that he intended petitioner’s document for 1996 to be his tax return for that year, he did not

6065; see also, e.g., Cupp v. Commissione ; 65 T.C. 68, 78-79 (1975), affd. without published opinion 559 F.2d 1207 (3d Cir. 1977). Accordingly, we sustain respondent's cetermination that petitioner is liable for the addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1). Addition to Tax Under Section 6654(a) Respondent further determined that petitioner is

1998-314 (stating that section 6065 applies to returns and other documents filed with - 6 - the Commissioner but does not apply to notices of deficiency); Janus v.

Commissioner, 82 T.C. 766, 777 (1984), affd. 793 F.2d 139 (6th Cir. 1986); see also Richardson v. Commissioner, 72 T.C. 818, 824 (1979) (stating that a signature on an attached letter is not considered an imputed signature on the return itself). Respondent has established the correct amount of petitioner’s 1993 Federal income ta

Section 6065 requires returns to contain or be verified by a written declaration that they are made under the penalties of perjury. To facilitate a taxpayer’s compliance with this requirement, the Form 1040 contains a preprinted jurat. By signing the jurat included within the Form 1040, a taxpayer satisfies the requirement that his return be execut

le for any tax * * * shall make a return * * * according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary.” A return required to be filed “shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury.” Sec. 6065; see also Plunkett v. Commissioner, 41 B.T.A. 700, 711 (1940), affd. 118 F.2d 644 (1st Cir. 1941); Wallace v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1975-133. Section 6061 provides that “any return, statement, or other document required to be made under

Commissioner, 65 T.C. 68, 78-79 (1975), affd. without published opinion 559 F.2d 1207 (3d Cir. 1977). Therefore, petitioner failed to file his 1979 tax return in a timely manner, and we hold that he is liable for the section 6651(a) addition to tax. III. Addition to Tax for Negligence Respondent contends that petitioner, pursuant

In regard to the fourth requirement, section 6065 requires that returns be verified in writing under penalty of perjury.

Section 6011(a)2 provides that “any person made liable for any tax .

Nonetheless, taxpayers do not forfeit their right to a prepayment forum concerning their individual income tax liabilities when they fail to file returns. Similarly, petitioners' failure to file a 2007 return should not deprive them ofa prepayment forum for contesting any adjustment ofthe loss they profess to have been allocated by SNJ,

Nonetheless, taxpayers do not forfeit their right to a prepayment forum concerning their individual income tax liabilities when they fail to file returns. Similarly, petitioners' failure to file a 2007 return should not deprive them ofa prepayment forum for contesting any adjustment ofthe loss they profess to have been allocated by SNJ,

With respect to the applicability ofthe civil fraud penalty under section 6663, section 6664(b) generally provides that the civil fraud penalty is applicable "only in cases where a return oftax is filed".

ing the award to a whistleblower. In making this argument, respondent notes that the Code mentions "internal revenue laws" in a number ofinstances. See, e.g., sec. 6301 ("The Secretary shall collect the taxes imposed by the internal revenue laws."); sec. 6065 ("Except as otherwise provided by the Secretary, any return, declaration, statement, or other document required to be made under any provision ofthe internal revenue laws * * * shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it i

ing the award to a whistleblower. In making this argument, respondent notes that the Code mentions "internal revenue laws" in a number ofinstances. See, e.g., sec. 6301 ("The Secretary shall collect the taxes imposed by the internal revenue laws."); sec. 6065 ("Except as otherwise provided by the Secretary, any return, declaration, statement, or other document required to be made under any provision ofthe internal revenue laws * * * shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it i

Section 6061(a) provides that "any return, statement, or other document required to be made under any provision ofthe internal revenue laws or regulations shall be signed in accordance with forms or regulations prescribed by the Secretary." Regulations promulgated under section 6061 provide: "Each individual * * * shall sign th

6065; 2000 Form 1040, p. 2. Petitioners advance two theories in support oftheir claim that the original 2000 return was a valid and timely filedjoint Federal income tax return despite the lack ofMrs. Reifler's signature.9 The first theory, the so-called substantial compliance doctrine, stands for the idea that a tax return need not be perfect

6065; see also Beard v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 766, 777 (1984), aff'd, 793 F.2d 139 (6th Cir. 1986); Deutsch v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-27, aff'd, 478 F.3d 450 (2d - 8 - Cir. 2007). Petitioner's argument that the consent should be treated as ajoint return is rejected. In closing we think it is appropriate to state that nothing in this Su

Section 6011(a) provides that "any person made liable for any tax * * * shall.make a return * * * according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary." A return required to be made "shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made underthe penalties ofperjury." Sec.

ies. The first is that "federal direct taxes which affect citizens ofthe several states must be apportioned."37 The Constitution at one time required this apportionment; however, with the adoption ofthe 16th Amendment in 1913, this rule no longer 3sSec. 6065. 36See, e.g., Sloan v. Commissioner, 53 F.3d 799 (7th Cir. 1995), afEg 102 T.C. 137 (1994); see also Williams v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 136 (2000). 37Cracking the Code, supra note 16, at 2. - 45 - [*45] applies to income taxes.38 It is uncle

able for any tax * * * shall make a return * * * according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary." A return required to be made "shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under the penalties ofperjury." Sec. 6065. Section 6061 provides that "any return, statement, or other document required to be made under any provision ofthe internal revenue laws or regulations shall be signed in accordance with forms or regulations prescribed by the Secretary." T

6065; see also sec. 1.6065-1(a), Income Tax Regs. A taxpayer satisfies this requirement by signing the preprinted jurat contained on the Form 1040, see Sloan v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 137, 146-147 (1994), affd. 53 F.3d 799 (7th Cir. 1995), which is a declaration under penalties of perjury that the return is “true, correct, and complete”. Even

6065; see also sec. 1.6065-1(a), Income Tax Regs. A taxpayer satisfies this requirement by signing the preprinted jurat contained on the Form 1040, see Sloan v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 137, 146-147 (1994), affd. 53 F.3d 799 (7th Cir. 1995), which is a declaration under penalties of perjury that the return is “true, correct, and complete”. Even

6065; see also sec. 1.6065-1(a), Income Tax Regs. A taxpayer satisfies this requirement by signing the preprinted jurat contained on the Form 1040, see Sloan v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 137, 146-147 (1994), affd. 53 F.3d 799 (7th Cir. 1995), which is a declaration under penalties of perjury that the return is “true, correct, and complete”. Even

Trial was set for January 30, 2002. - 9 - At the time of trial, respondent presented copies of Form 4340, Certificate of Assessments, Payments, and Other Specified Matters, under seal, for each year. Petitioner objected to the exhibits as hearsay. Rule 803(10) of the Federal Rules of Evidence provides: Rule 803(10). ABSENCE OF PUBLIC RE

He wrote in part: Therefore, I am requesting that you comply with IRS Code Section 6065 and send me a statement which “is verified by a written declaration that is made under - 6 - the penalties of perjury”.

le for any tax * * * shall make a return * * * according to the forms and regulations prescribed by the Secretary.” A return required to be filed “shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury.” Sec. 6065. Sec. 6061 provides the general rule that “any return, statement, or other document required to be made under any provision of the internal revenue laws or regulations shall be signed in accordance with forms or regulations prescribed by th

Internal Revenue Code §6201 and 26 USC §6065, clearly defines that a duly authorized signature be present on these forms.

othing indicated on form 4549-A, which is an attachment to the Notice of Deficiency that clearly defines that a duly authorized signature is present as required by the Internal Revenue Code sec. 6201, nor are any of the forms in compliance to 26 USC § 6065. Petitioner, on information and belief, alleges that the sole purpose of respondent’s Notice of Deficiency is for the obvious purpose of ensnaring the petitioner into a fraudulently obtained Federal Tax Court jurisdiction. On the provision tha

Internal Revenue Code §6201 and 26 USC §6065, clearly defines that a duly authorized signature be present on these forms.

rnal Revenue Code specifies that a return "shall be signed in accordance with forms or regulations prescribed by the Secretary", sec. 6061(a), it "shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury", sec. 6065, and it shall be filed at the place specified by the Internal Revenue Code and the regulations promulgated thereunder, sec. 6091. In the case of the return of an individual, the general rule is that the return shall be made to the Secretary

Internal Revenue Code §6201 and 26 USC §6065, clearly defines that a duly authorized signature be present on these forms.

Internal Revenue Code §6201 and 26 USC §6065, clearly defines that a duly authorized signature be present on these forms.

such distributions represent nontaxable payments received from past "sales" of labor at no "gain". He also argues that the Form 1099R reporting an IRA distribution to him in 1994 is invalid unless it is "signed under the penalty of perjury", citing section 6065. Upon analysis of the record in this case, we find that petitioner has not disputed his connection with the tax- generating income ascribed to him by respondent. Respondent determined for the year 1994 that petitioner received an unrepor

ny tax * * * shall make a return * * * according to the forms - 7 - and regulations prescribed by the Secretary." A return required to be filed "shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury." Sec. 6065. Section 6061 provides the general rule that "any return, statement, or other document required to be made under any provision of the internal revenue laws or regulations shall be signed in accordance with forms or regulations prescribed by t

According to IR Code section 6065, the NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY has been improperly signed.

d by any part of this tax liability that was paid within the prescribed time period. Sec. 6651(b). Petitioner filed his return for 1986 3 years late. The Form 1040 he filed for 1987 was not signed under penalty of - 18 - perjury in accordance with section 6065. Under well-settled law, the unsigned form does not constitute a valid return, and hence petitioner filed no return for 1987.3 Lucas v. Pilliod Lumber Co., 281 U.S. 245, 248-249 (1930); Dixon v. Commissioner, 28 T.C. 338, 346-348 (1957); P