- 3 - failed to report it in income. The factors we analyzed included the following: During the years in issue Mr. and Mrs. Sympson purchased a 25-acre ranch and home valued in 1986 at $500,000, thereby doubling their home investment and tripling their mortgage payments; they purchased two new Jaguars; they built a $50,000 to $75,000 polo field on their ranch; and they employed a maid. Mr. Sympson gave Mrs. Sympson an $8,000 diamond and a $3,000 fur coat. The Court of Appeals held that even assuming Mrs. Sympson had benefited substantially, that was not a dispositive factor, considering that she and her husband were later forced into bankruptcy and some of their properties (not including the $500,000 ranch) were turned over to the embezzlement victim. The Court of Appeals said: "Because a determination of equity is based on all the facts and circumstances, we hold that under these circumstances it would be inequitable as well as unconscionable to hold Mrs. Sympson liable for these deficiencies." Estate of Sympson v. Commissioner, 75 AFTR 2d at 95-2257, 95-1 USTC par. 50,276, at 88,021. The parties stipulated that of the amounts received by Mr. Sympson from Olga B. Roderick's accounts, $145,000, $107,640, $109,444, $250,233, $105,350, and $181,005 for the 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, and 1987 taxable years, respectively, were not reported on petitioners' income tax returns.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011