Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Oregon » Tax Court Magistrate Division » 2010 » Maciel v. Department of Revenue
Maciel v. Department of Revenue
State: Oregon
Court: Oregon District Court
Docket No: 100824B
Case Date: 12/10/2010
Judge: Jeffrey S. Mattson
Plaintiff: Maciel
Defendant: Department of Revenue
Specialty: Income Tax
Preview:IN THE OREGON TAX COURT MAGISTRATE DIVISION Income Tax IGNACIO MACIEL MACIEL, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, State of Oregon, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

TC-MD 100824B

DECISION

Plaintiff appealed from Defendants Notices of Deficiency Assessment for tax years 2006, 2007, and 2008. Those assessments followed Notices of Deficiency disallowing two of Plaintiffs dependent exemptions and changing his filing status from head of household to single. A case management conference was held on August 18, 2010. The case management conference was followed by a Journal Entry filed on August 26, 2010. The court cannot consider the merits of the appeal for 2008 because it was filed late. For that year, Defendants Notice of Deficiency Assessment was mailed January 20, 2010. Plaintiff acknowledged that he postmarked the Complaint to the court May 13, 2010, which is more than 90 days after the date Defendants Notices of Deficiency became final. See ORS 305.280(2);1 McDowell v. Dept. of Rev., TC-MD No 050812C at 2 (Nov 28, 2005) (citing ORS 305.280(2) (2003) and holding that taxpayers appeal filed three days after the statutory deadline must be dismissed). The remaining discussion relates to tax years 2006 and 2007. Plaintiff states he sent money to family members living in Mexico. Plaintiff states that he was supporting his relatives who reside in that country. Plaintiff does not know what the familys total living expenses were
1

Unless otherwise noted, all references to the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) are to 2007.

DECISION TC-MD 100824B

1

in Mexico for either of the remaining tax years at issue. Some copies of receipts were provided; however, they were not dated for either of the tax years at issue. Based on its review of the information, Defendant requests the Notices of Deficiency Assessment be upheld. (Defs Status Report, Nov 10, 2010). ORS 316.695(1)(c)(E) (2005) provides that the term " ,,head of household ha[s] the meaning given th[at] term[] in section 2 of the Internal Revenue Code." Internal Revenue Code (IRC) section 2, in turn, defines "head of household" to include an unmarried individual who, for more than one-half of the taxable year, "maintains as his home a household which constitutes for more than one-half of such taxable year the principal place of abode" of his otherwise qualifying unmarried children and "any other person who is a dependent of the taxpayer, if the taxpayer is entitled to a deduction for the taxable year for such person under section 151 [of the IRC.]" IRC
Download 100824BMacielDecision.pdf

Oregon Law

Oregon State Laws
Oregon Tax
Oregon Court
    > Muller v. Oregon
Oregon Labor Laws
Oregon Agencies
    > DMV Oregon

Comments

Tips