James E. Anderson v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter
Citation Limited Pursuant to 1st Cir. Loc. R. 32.3
United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 04-2628
JAMES E. ANDERSON, ET AL.,
Petitioners, Appellants,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
Respondent, Appellee.
ON APPEAL FROM THE DECISION OF
THE UNITED STATES TAX COURT
Before
Torruella, Lipez and Howard,
Circuit Judges.
James E. Anderson and Cheryl J. Latos on brief pro se.
Eileen J. O'Connor, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J.
Clark and Kenneth W. Rosenberg on brief for appellee.
July 5, 2005

-- 1 of 2 --

1 Accordingly, we deny oral argument.
-2-
Per Curiam. After carefully considering the briefs and
record on appeal, we affirm for substantially the reasons stated by
the Tax Court.1 Among other problems, the appellants fail to show
that the statute categorizes their income as employee income.
'Proceeds' is not synonymous with 'gross proceeds'. The amount of
compensation paid to one entitled to receive only a share of the
net proceeds from the sale of the catch depends on the size of the
catch, as required.
The appellants have not presented a coherent account of
their interpretation of the regulation. The amount of a share of
the catch, in their sense, must always depend on many factors other
than catch-size, e.g., the market and other conditions.
Affirmed. 1st Cir. R. 27(c).

-- 2 of 2 --