I didn't see a posting here on this, so here is one!
See:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreill ... g-deficit/
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
WASHINGTON, DC 20217
KENT HOVIND,
Petitioner,
v.
COMMISSIONER
OF
INTERNAL REVENUE,
Respondent
Docket No. 4245-10.
ORDER AND DECISION
On December 26, 2012, respondent filed a Motion for Entry of Decision.
By Orders dated January 9 and February 13, 2013, petitioner was ordered to file an Objection, if any, to respondent's motion.
To date, petitioner has filed no response to respondent's motion.
In view of the foregoing, it is ORDERED that respondent's Motion for Entry of Decision is granted.
It is further ORDERED AND DECIDED that there are deficiencies, penalties and additions to tax due from petitioner as follows:
Year Deficiency 6651(f) 6651(a)(2) 6654
1998 $113,026.00 $ 81,943.85 $ 28,256.50 $ 5,130.06
1999 $195,708.00 $141,888.30 $ 48,927.00 $ 9,399.26
2000 $197,061.00 $142,426.98 $ 49,112.75 $10,562.41
2001 $155,216.00 $112,531.60 $ 38,804.00 $ 6,203.03
2002 $155,238.00 $111,920.43 $ 38,593.25 $ 5,155.49
2003 $136,545.00 $ 98,995.13 $ 34,136.25 $ 3,523.02
2004 $267,428.00 $193,885.30 $ 66,857.00 $ 7,663.70
2005 $298,640.00 $216,514.00 $ 65,700.80 $11,978.91
2006 $147,669.00 $107,060.03 $ 23,627.04 $ 6,988.26
(Signed)
John O. Colvin
Chief Judge
ENTERED: MAY 15 2013
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
Tax Court Rules in Kent Hovind Case!
-
- Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
- Posts: 811
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:18 pm
-
- Pirate Judge of Which Things Work
- Posts: 321
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:13 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Tax Court Rules in Kent Hovind Case!
Soon we the American people will be not so proud owners of a Creationist Dinosaur park.
I'd rather have a landfill.
I'd rather have a landfill.
Remember that CtC is about the rule of law.
John J. Bulten
John J. Bulten
-
- Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
- Posts: 4287
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 6:02 am
Re: Tax Court Rules in Kent Hovind Case!
At least you can draw methane out of a landfill.
Three cheers for the Lesser Evil!
10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
-
- First Mate
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 9:11 pm
- Location: England
Re: Tax Court Rules in Kent Hovind Case!
How would you tell the difference?jkeeb wrote:Soon we the American people will be not so proud owners of a Creationist Dinosaur park.
I'd rather have a landfill.
-
- First Mate
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 9:11 pm
- Location: England
Re: Tax Court Rules in Kent Hovind Case!
Perhaps I am a masochist or just plain wierd, but something persuaded me to look art the website of Dinosaus Adventure Land.
On it, it appears that the street running to the south of the site of Dinosaur Adventure Land is called Van Pelt Lane,
http://pensacola.creationstore.org/dalmap.php
Is this the reason that he changed his name?
On it, it appears that the street running to the south of the site of Dinosaur Adventure Land is called Van Pelt Lane,
http://pensacola.creationstore.org/dalmap.php
Is this the reason that he changed his name?