Data were provided by national statistics on small case and regular Tax Court proceedings; Government records on 1,100 small case disputes; a mail survey of small case litigants; and observations at hearings. Findings indicate that a majority of taxpayers in small case disputes were not represented by an attorney and that less elite social classes were availing themselves of the procedure. Most of the cases raised deduction issues. In observed hearings, both judges and Government counsel showed respect and understanding for the difficulties facing the pro se litigant. On the basis of findings, it is concluded that small case procedure has succeeded in providing a forum in which it is possible to dispute alleged tax deficiencies pro se with reasonable prospects of success. This success appears attributable to the unique dispute posture for the Tax Court petitioner and the extensive resources assigned to the procedure by the Tax Court and Chief Counsel to the Internal Revenue Service. The expenditure of such resources in the Tax Court apparently reflects a need to legitimate the tax system by providing fair disputing procedures. Footnotes and tabular data are provided.