- 5 -
evasiveness or deceit." Bliss v. Commissioner, 59 F.3d 374, 379
(2d Cir. 1995), affg. T.C. Memo. 1993-390.
We feel somewhat constrained in our findings, because, in
addition to stating that it would be unconscionable to hold Mrs.
Sympson liable, the Court of Appeals commented on some of the
evidence which would bear on our analysis. For instance, we
would ordinarily have given weight to the Sympsons' increasing
wealth and expenditures during the years in issue in contrast to
the amounts reported on the income tax returns. From 1982
through 1987, the Sympsons reported taxable income as follows:
Year Amount
1982 ($22,561)
1983 32,266
1984 25,111
1985 -0-
1986 -0-
1987 -0-
Ordinarily, such a disparity would be a factor putting one on
notice and would support a finding that a spouse had reason to
know of an understatement.
We feel instructed, however, by the court's finding that
"there is substantial evidence that the lifestyle of the Sympsons
during this period did not change." Estate of Sympson v.
Commissioner, 75 AFTR 2d at 95-2257, 95-1 USTC par. 50,276, at
88,021. The Court of Appeals also said:
In contrast to this evidence [i.e. of increasing
expenditures], Mrs. Sympson testified that, while the
family lifestyle gradually improved each year
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011