Dennis J. Tang and Alice Shu-Ling Tang - Page 12

                                       - 12 -                                         
               Petitioner claims that he is not the individual who ought to           
          be properly charged with the money Dr. Chan and Shanghai Clinic             
          paid for the lessons that petitioner taught.  We disagree.                  
               Petitioner testified that, in 1990, Dr. Chan offered, merely           
          as a sign of gratitude on his own volition, to write petitioner a           
          check for any amount petitioner requested.  Instead, petitioner             
          instructed Dr. Chan to show his gratitude by sending a gift or              
          check to Yao Min Ting, the person from whom petitioner learned              
          the principles and philosophy of Taoism.  Petitioner and Dr. Chan           
          did not discuss a particular amount; instead, Dr. Chan was to               
          separate his gifts into different installments as he saw fit.               
          Dr. Chan contradicts this, saying that the money he paid was a              
          fee for lessons and not a gift.                                             
               Dr. Chan credibly testified that the checks were not made              
          out to petitioner only because petitioner requested that they be            
          made out in other people's names.  Dr. Chan did not question why            
          petitioner requested that the checks, in payment for lessons                
          given by himself, were to be made out to other persons.                     
               One of the primary principles of our system of income                  
          taxation is that income must be taxed to the one that earns it.             
          Commissioner v. Culbertson, 337 U.S. 733, 739-740 (1949).                   
          Attempts to subvert this principle by deflecting income away from           
          the true earner to another entity, however clever, will not be              
          successful.  Lucas v. Earl, 281 U.S. 111 (1930).  The choice of             
          the proper taxpayer revolves around the question of which person            




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011