16
for any other aspect of the metal mining and refining activity in
1990. Petitioner also submitted a daily log of his activities
which incorporates 1990. However, much of what is written down
in that journal contains unexplained abbreviations. There are
blank spaces for a large number of days each month for 1990.
Moreover, petitioner’s compendium is not an adequate substitute
for books or records of income and expenses. For example, unlike
the records of sales of mercury, this does not list customers,
the kind of work performed, and the amounts charged, if any.
Thus, we cannot say that petitioner maintained adequate and
accurate books of accounts.
Petitioner’s marketing activities were, at best, minimal.
He advertised in the "California Mining Journal". Petitioner
distributed a prospectus on his sales policies to possible
clients. He also attended trade shows where he could meet
prospective customers. The records of sales of mercury show that
most of petitioner’s clients came from within California. There
were very few clients who were from out of State. Other than the
above factors, petitioner presented no evidence that he actively
sought business. Petitioner has not specifically shown any other
marketing activities in 1990.
In addition, petitioner had no business plan. At trial,
petitioner testified that he did not expect to earn a profit
immediately during 1986, before the dispute with DHS. He
expected to do so in 1987 but did not do so. The record reflects
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011