Eric Wynn - Page 21

                                        - 21 -                                        
          Issue 2:  1984--Section 6653(b)(1) and (2)                                  
               A. Section 6653(b)(1).  Because there was no conviction or             
          admission for 1984, respondent must prove fraud in order to                 
          sustain the addition to tax for fraud under section 6653(b)(1).             
          See Drieborg v. Commissioner, 225 F.2d at 219-220 (holding that             
          the Commissioner's proof of fraud for one year will not sustain             
          the Commissioner's burden for another year).  The F&M and W&Y               
          transactions are subject to the same analysis for this addition             
          and year as they are for the 6653(b)(2) addition for 1983.  For             
          the reasons set out supra pp. 14-16 with respect to 1983, we find           
          that respondent has failed to carry her burden of proving an                
          underpayment concerning the F&M and W&Y transactions for 1984.              
               The final items for 1984 are the checks that Walter Capital            
          made to the order of Joe Bass.  These transactions are subject to           
          traditional analysis used to determine whether there is income:             
          did petitioner receive the funds so as to have an accession to              
          wealth, Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426 (1955),            
          or did petitioner earn the fees, Lucas v. Earl, 281 U.S. 111                
          (1930)?                                                                     
               Although respondent has presented a stronger case on these             
          transactions than she did on the alleged embezzlement                       
          transactions, she has failed to prove by clear and convincing               
          evidence that petitioner received the Walter Capital payments.              
          Respondent put all her effort at trial into trying to show that             
          the Joe Bass bank account was petitioner's nominee account.                 




Page:  Previous  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011