- 9 -
and provides no basis for denying respondent's motion for summary
judgment.
1. The Deficiencies
The deemed stipulations in these cases establish that
petitioners were married and residents of Texas, a community
property State, during the tax years at issue. Thus, on the
facts here presented, each petitioner is liable for the tax on
his or her respective share of community property income. See
Hopkins v. Bacon, 282 U.S. 122 (1930); Poe v. Seaborn, 282 U.S.
101 (1930). Petitioners have not asserted that the notices of
deficiency are arbitrary or erroneous and have failed to offer
any evidence disputing respondent's determinations as to the
deficiencies.
Moreover, every item of income that respondent determined
was received by each petitioner individually is supported by
documentation to which petitioners are deemed to have stipulated,
including the Federal income tax returns filed by Mrs. Stafford
reporting wage income earned in her individual capacity.
Statements in a tax return are admissions. Waring v.
Commissioner, 412 F.2d 800, 801 (3d Cir. 1969), affg. per curiam
T.C. Memo. 1968-126; Estate of Hall v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 312,
337-338 (1989); Lare v. Commissioner, 62 T.C. 739, 750 (1974),
3(...continued)
was redesignated as the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 by the 99th
Congress on Oct. 22, 1986, Pub. L. 99-514, sec. 2(a), 100 Stat.
2095.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011