That’s what Sam William Palmer found out, recently, in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, when he raised what the court deemed a frivolous argument. Seems Palmer took exception to the Commissioner’s deficiency notice regarding Palmer’s failure to file and pay in 2006 – not because he disagreed with the deficiency tax determination or the penalty amount, however.
Instead, Palmer argued that the notice of deficiency was unauthorized because only the district director designated to the district where he resided had authority to issue him the notice. He argued that a director from Holtsville, New York, had no authority to issue him a notice because he is a resident of Oklahoma.
No dice, said the Tax Court, and the 10th Circuit agreed.
And to add insult to injury, the 10th Circuit noted that Palmer had previously raised essentially the same arguments relative to a 2007 deficiency, labeling his deportment a “waste of judicial resources,” and imposing $4,000 of “sanctions” on the taxpayer.
It didn’t help Palmer’s most recent case that he hadn’t paid the full amount of the sanctions, which obviously riled the Court, resulting this time in not only dismissal of Palmer’s appeal, but also imposition of $8,000 in new sanctions!