John J. Burke and Vivian Burke - Page 13

                  The determinations in respondent's notice of deficiency are presumed                  
            correct, and petitioners bear the burden of proving otherwise.  Rule 142(a);                
            Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).                                               
                  Section 61(a) defines gross income to include "all income from whatever               
            source derived".  In addition, the Supreme Court has determined that gross                  
            income includes all "'accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which                
            the taxpayers have complete dominion'", including illegal earnings.  James v.               
            United States, 366 U.S. 213, 219 (1961) (quoting Commissioner v. Glenshaw                   
            Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426, 431 (1955)); accord Rutkin v. United States, 343 U.S.              
            130, 137-138 (1952); Ianniello v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 165, 173 (1992).                    
                  Borrowed funds are not included in the taxpayer's gross income "because               
            the taxpayer's obligation to repay the funds offsets any increase in the                    
            taxpayer's assets".  United States v. Centennial Sav. Bank FSB, 499 U.S. 573,               
            582 (1991); accord Moore v. United States, 412 F.2d 974, 978 (5th Cir. 1969);               
            United States v. Rochelle, 384 F.2d 748, 751 (5th Cir. 1967).  The hallmarks                
            of a loan are:  (1) Consensual recognition between the borrower and the lender              
            of the existence of the loan, i.e., the obligation to repay; and (2) bona fide              
            intent on the part of the borrower to repay the funds advanced.  Collins v.                 
            Commissioner, 3 F.3d 625, 631 (2d Cir. 1993), affg. T.C. Memo. 1992-478.                    
                  There is no credible evidence in the record of any loan agreement                     
            between U.S. Life and Mr. Burke.  Rather, the evidence clearly establishes                  
            that Mr. Burke was obligated to place all MPC premiums in a special premium                 
            bank account.  From this account, Mr. Burke was permitted to withdraw his 15-               
            percent annualized commission, but he was obligated to remit the remaining                  
            amounts to U.S. Life.  Mr. Burke never received permission from U.S. Life to                
            take any amounts from the MPC premium account in excess of his commissions.                 
            When U.S. Life realized it was not receiving its portion of the premiums in a               
            timely fashion, it made inquiries and demanded payment.  Mr. Burke responded                
            with false statements and never told U.S. Life that he had "borrowed" the                   
            money from the premium account.  Eventually, U.S. Life brought suit and                     
            obtained a judgment against Mr. Burke.                                                      




Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011