- 20 -
out and I went by that list. Whatever that
list said, I went and got. I didn’t try to
get it cheaper. I had to be responsible for
BMAP. BMAP was my responsibility. He was
paying me to go get the parts, so I went
through the price list, and I paid what was
on that list.
We cannot accept the assertion that petitioner paid
the amount set forth in BMAP’s price list for every
automobile part he supplied to BMAP during the years in
issue. Petitioners introduced no books and records for
Mr. Vetrano’s automobile parts business, and nothing in the
record corroborates petitioner’s testimony. We find
petitioner’s testimony incredible and not worthy of belief.
In this connection, we note that even the Schedules C filed
with petitioner’s own tax returns for 1986 and 1987 show a
profit margin of approximately 11.5 percent. Accordingly,
we sustain respondent’s determination that petitioner
received unreported income from BMAP.
Employee Versus Independent Contractor
As mentioned above, it is unnecessary to determine
whether petitioner was an employee or an independent
contractor in order to resolve the issue of whether
Mr. Vetrano realized unreported income during the years
at issue. However, it is necessary to decide that issue
in order to redetermine whether petitioners are liable
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011