- 147 - petitioner has the burden of proof on the negligence issue, we conclude that petitioner conceded this issue. See subparagraphs (4) and (5) of Rule 151(e); Sundstrand Corp. v. Commissioner, 96 T.C. 226, 344 (1991); Money v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 46, 48 (1987). The negligence addition to tax applies to those 1986 items in supra table 12, that we found had a personal purpose and with respect to which we did not sustain respondent’s fraud determination or with respect to which respondent did not determine fraud. The negligence addition to tax also applies to those 1986 items in supra table 12, the purpose of which we were unable to determine on this record; those items total $3,325.84. We hold for respondent on this issue. III. Amounts of Deficiencies In this part of the opinion, petitioner has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent erred in the notice of deficiency determinations as to matters of fact. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). A. Amounts of Constructive Dividends In supra table 10, we set forth our conclusions that $10,164.71 of the disputed 1985 amounts was constructive dividends to Betsy, that $90 were Sley Corporations’ business expenses, and that we could not find that the remaining $12,759.63 of disputed Markette payments fit into eitherPage: Previous 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011