- 6 -
herein that she received loan repayments of $119,581 during that
year. The Workpaper also suggests that petitioner’s salary in
1988 was $75,000, but petitioner has agreed in connection with
this case that it was $35,193, without making any effort to
explain the discrepancy. Furthermore, the Workpaper’s recitation
that petitioner earned $98,570 in commissions and $75,000 in
salary is consistent with the proposition that she received at
least $119,581 in compensation from Bankers Mortgage during 1988.
Given the foregoing problems, the Workpaper, at most, supports an
inference that petitioner made some loans to Bankers Mortgage.
It does not, however, support a finding that respondent erred in
determining that petitioner received nonemployee compensation of
$119,581 from Bankers Mortgage during 1988.
Petitioner did not present any other evidence from the books
and records of Bankers Mortgage to prove the existence of loans
or to clarify how Bankers Mortgage treated the payments in issue
for its own tax and financial reporting purposes.4 Her testimony
further indicated that the alleged loans were not evidenced by
promissory notes, were not secured by collateral, and did not
earn interest.
4 During pretrial proceedings, this Court repeatedly
informed petitioner of her responsibility to substantiate her
claim that the Form 1099 information Bankers Mortgage furnished
to respondent was erroneous. At trial, petitioner claimed to
possess the books and records of Bankers Mortgage but admitted
she never presented such documents to respondent and did not
bring them to the trial proceedings.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011