Angela Matthews - Page 7

                                                - 7 -                                                 
            irrelevant.  Mr. Ray's attempt to raise the burden of proof in                            
            light of the concessions at trial is patently unreasonable.  As a                         
            further matter, we note that, even if the burden of proof were an                         
            issue, petitioners' argument is without merit.  There is no                               
            question that a taxpayer generally bears the burden of proving                            
            that the Commissioner's determination is erroneous.  See Rockwell                         
            v. Commissioner, 512 F.2d 882 (9th Cir. 1975), affg. T.C. Memo.                           
            1972-133; INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992).                          
                  As previously indicated, we will not address Mr. Ray's other                        
            arguments.  To do so may suggest that these arguments are                                 
            tenable.  The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit responded to                         
            similar tax protestor arguments as follows: "We perceive no need                          
            to refute these arguments with somber reasoning and copious                               
            citation of precedent; to do so might suggest that these                                  
            arguments have some colorable merit."  Crain v. Commissioner,                             
            supra at 1417.  The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit                                
            followed Crain v. Commissioner, supra, in Sauers v. Commissioner,                         
            771 F.2d 64, 67 (3d Cir. 1985), affg. T.C. Memo. 1984-367.                                
                  The final issue pertains to respondent's motion for                                 
            penalties and costs pursuant to section 6673.5  In their                                  

            5  Sec. 6673(a) provides:                                                                 
                        (1) Procedures instituted primarily for delay,                                
                  etc.--Whenever it appears to the Tax Court that--                                   
                              (A) proceedings before it have been                                     
                        instituted or maintained by the taxpayer                                      

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011