Beard v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
82 T.C. 766 (1984)
- Written by Daniel Clark, JD
Facts
Robert Beard (plaintiff) was a participant in a coordinated effort to protest the federal government’s taxation of earned wages as income. Under Treasury regulations, a taxpayer could file his annual return using Treasury Form 1040. Beard tampered with an official copy of Form 1040, changing several item captions. On several lines, for example, Beard deleted the word income and added the words gain or receipts. Beard also claimed a deduction to income equal to the entire amount of wages he received from his employer and sought a refund for the wages his employer had withheld. Although many of the captions had been altered, Beard accurately entered the proper amounts as line items. That is, apart from the claimed deduction equal to his wages, Beard’s form was filled out in the same way that a properly completed, nonaltered form would have been. Beard and fellow protestors filed such tampered forms with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (defendant). Many of these purported returns included memoranda arguing that inclusion of wages as taxable income was unlawful. The IRS refused to accept Beard’s form as a valid tax return. The IRS determined a deficiency and assessed a penalty for failure to file a tax return. Beard petitioned the United States Tax Court, challenging the IRS’s position. The IRS filed a motion for summary judgment to affirm the deficiency and penalties.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Whitaker, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Chabot, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

