WHISTLE B. CURRIER
1305 S. 102 Street
West Allis, WI 53214-3905,
WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
P.O. Box 8907
Madison, WI 53708-8907,
|DOCKET NO. 03-I-339
RULING AND ORDER
JENNIFER E. NASHOLD, COMMISSIONER:
This case comes before the Commission on a motion filed by respondent, Wisconsin Department of Revenue, to dismiss the petition for review under Wis. Stat. §802.06(2)(a)6 for petitioner's failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. Petitioner, Whistle B. Currier, appears pro se. The Department appears by Chief Counsel Lili Best Crane. Both parties have submitted affidavits with exhibits and briefs.
Based upon the entire record in this case and the parties' submissions, the Commission hereby finds, rules, and orders as follows:
1. During the years 1999, 2000, and 2001, petitioner resided in Wisconsin.
2. During these same years, petitioner received retirement annuity payments from the Department of Employee Trust Funds of gross distributions in the following amounts:
3. Petitioner filed no tax return for any of these years.
4. On May 12, 2003, the Department issued an income tax assessment to petitioner for $9,588.57, including interest, penalties, and fees, for 1999 through 2001.
5. On July 14, 2003, petitioner filed a petition for redetermination of the assessment.
6. The Department denied petitioner's petition for redetermination of the assessment by notice dated October 20, 2003, mailed to petitioner by certified mail, return receipt requested, and received by petitioner on October 27, 2003.
7. On December 22, 2003, the Commission received petitioner's petition for review of the action on the petition for redetermination. In his petition for review, petitioner argued that the Department failed to provide an adequate basis for determining that petitioner owed taxes for 1999, 2000, and 2001, and that the Department therefore deprived petitioner of due process.
Petitioner does not argue that his retirement annuity payments are not subject to taxation under Wis. Stat. § 71.02(1),(1) nor does he argue that he was not required to file under Wis. Stat. § 71.03(2). Likewise, he does not challenge the Department's authority to make a default assessment against him under Wis. Stat. § 71.74(3) or the accuracy of the amount assessed. Rather, the crux of his argument is that the Department has not adequately justified its tax assessment against him. However, the basis for the assessment is found in the statutes referenced above and cited by the Department. Because petitioner does not challenge the Department's application of these provisions to him, he presents no grounds for challenging the assessment imposed by the Department.
Based on the foregoing, the Commission grants the Department's motion to dismiss.
IT IS ORDERED
That petitioner's petition for review is dismissed.
Dated at Madison, Wisconsin, this 16th day of June, 2004.
WISCONSIN TAX APPEALS COMMISSION
Don M. Millis, Commission Chairperson p> Jennifer E. Nashold, Commissioner
ATTACHMENT: "NOTICE OF APPEAL INFORMATION"
June 16, 2004 Ruling and Order
July 7, 2004 Petition for Rehearing filed.
July 13, 2004 Petition for Rehearing denied pursuant to Wis Stat. 227.49(1).
August 11, 2004 Appealed to Milwaukee County Circuit Court (04CV007039).
December 14, 2004 Decision and Order from Milwaukee County Circuit Court (04CV007039) - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT; 1. The Department's Motion for Reconsideration is GRANTED, [and] 2. The Petition for Judicial Review is DISMISSED.
December 14, 2005 Notice of Motion for Reconsideration filed with Wisconsin Court of Appeals (04CV7039) - APPEAL form and order of the Circuit Court of Milwaukee County: RICHARD J. SANKOVITZ, Judge. Affirmed.
1 Any such argument would be foreclosed by William E. Currier v. Wis. Dep't of Revenue, Milwaukee County Circuit Court Case No. 94-CV-012289 (April 6, 1995), p. 4 ("[t]he term 'income' includes retirement annuities.")