E. Joan Birkey & Larry E. Birkey, Petitioners

T.C.

Court: United States Tax Court

Citations: 2007 T.C. Summ. Op. 72

Decision Date: 5/9/2007

Docket Number: 6392-05

Bluebook Citation: E. Joan Birkey & Larry E. Birkey, Petitioners, 2007 T.C. Summ. Op. 72 (T.C. 2007)

More Cases: T.C. decisions from 2007

T .C . Summary Opinion 2007-72

STAT .

I!,

UNITED STATES TAX COUR T

E . JOAN BIRKEY AND LARRY E . BIRKEY, Petitioners v . COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Responden t Docket No . 6392-05S .

Filed May 9, 2007 .

E . Joan Birkey and Larry E . Birkey, pro sese .

Catherine Tyson, for respondent .

FOLEY, Judge : This case was heard pursuant to section 74631 of the Internal Revenue Code . Pursuant to section 7463(b), the decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion shall not be treated as precedent for any other case . The issue for decision is whether petitioners failed t o ' Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue .

5EBYER MAY 9 1 2007 report income relating to 2002 .

Background In 2002, petitioners received interest income from three banks . In addition, on December 6, 2002, Ms . Birkey received $40,433 from her Keogh account (i .e ., a qualified retirement plan for self-employed individuals) . On that same day, Ms . Birkey used those funds to purchase U .S . Savings Bonds . Petitioners, on their 2002 joint Federal income tax return, did not include in gross income the interest income and the distribution from the Keogh account .

On January 24, 2005, respondent sent petitioners a notice of deficiency relating to 2002 . Respondent determined that petitioners failed to report the interest income and the distribution from the Keogh account . On April 5, 2005, petitioners, while residing in Osage Beach, Missouri, filed their petition with the Court .

Discussion Pursuant to section 61(a)(4), interest income is included i n gross income . Pursuant to section 72, amounts distributed from a Keogh account are included in gross income in the year of receipt . See sec . 402(a) . Petitioners contend that purchasing U .S . Savings Bonds with the distribution from the Keogh account is a "qualified rollover" (i .e ., the distribution would not be includable in their gross income) . No such exception exists .

Sec . 402(c)(1) ; Lemishow v . Commissioner , 110 T .C . 110, 112 (1998) . Accordingly, respondent's determinations are sustained .2 Contentions we have not addressed are irrelevant, moot, or meritless .

To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entere d for respondent .

i STATES TAX COURT UNGTON, D(cid:127) C(cid:127) 20217" 002 OF ACIpL BUSINESS LIV FOR PRIVATE USE, X300 7004 116 OOp0 961 53 ri o 1Z ~=, 4 . L .1y , . .5 fr; ' .J 5 . .~ __) ..l r - )1k i .». ., .. .

.., . .

. - 1 fit!"~ it 34OS (1p)412 r Clev' k :S iM

  1. Sec . 7491(a) is inapplicable because petitioners failed to introduce credible evidence within the meaning of sec . 7491(a)(1) .

Chat with this case using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this case, check whether it is still good law, and see every case that cites it. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.