Q: Do third-party information returns alone, like a 1099-k create a federal and / or State tax filing liability?
Not being a U.S. citizen or resident alien, I have not signed a W2, I-9 or W-9 form or filed a 1040 form as I do not reside in the United States per 26 USC 7701(a)(9) and (a)(10) nor do I reside in the State of California: I have refuted the presumptions and denied the allegations presented by informing them of the forgoing facts about my situation via unrefuted affidavits. Question: Does California's FTB / OTA presumption(s) have legal / lawful jurisdiction over me via third-party information-returns alone? I see that California Evidence Code 520 provides: The party claiming that a person is guilty of crime or wrongdoing has the burden of proof on that issue; and also read that: Allocation of the burden of proof in tax deficiency cases is well settled: In an action to collect tax, the government bears the burden of proof. Ae R. Hong; Kun Kim, Petitioners-appellants, v. Commissioner Internal Revenue Service, Respondent-appellee, 24 F.3d 246 (9th Cir. 1994). Thanks!!
A:
Based on the information provided, if you are not a U.S. citizen or resident alien and do not reside in the United States, third-party information returns like a 1099-K alone do not automatically create a federal or state tax filing liability. Your status as a non-resident alien under 26 USC 7701(a)(9) and (a)(10) means you are generally not subject to U.S. tax laws if you do not have U.S. source income.
In California, the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) or the Office of Tax Appeals (OTA) would need to establish their jurisdiction over you. The California Evidence Code 520 requires the party claiming wrongdoing to bear the burden of proof. This means that the FTB or OTA must prove that you have a tax filing obligation under California law.
Furthermore, case law such as Ae R. Hong; Kun Kim, Petitioners-Appellants, v. Commissioner Internal Revenue Service, Respondent-Appellee, supports that the government bears the burden of proof in tax deficiency cases. Therefore, unless the FTB or OTA can prove that you have a filing requirement based on California law, their presumptions alone do not establish legal jurisdiction over you.
1 user found this answer helpful
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
