- 15 -
On brief, petitioner does not question respondent’s
determination, based on the bank deposit method, of the amount of
income earned by Pieces of Eight during 1987. Rather, petitioner
claims that he is not taxable on that income because Ms. Murphy
alone owned the business. Ms. Murphy, however, testified that
Pieces of Eight was a business owned and operated by both
petitioner and her during the years in issue. Ms. Murphy
testified that petitioner did not wish to have the business in
his name because he feared that it would be taken from him to
satisfy liens and judgments that were outstanding against him.
We found Ms. Murphy a credible witness and accept her testimony.
Moreover, on at least one invoice that is in the record,
petitioner represented himself as an owner of Pieces of Eight.
Petitioner’s conflicting stories concerning the ownership of
Pieces of Eight also render his claims implausible. Prior to and
at the beginning of the audit, petitioner claimed that Kathleen
Murphy, a woman he had never seen, had owned Pieces of Eight.
Kathleen Murphy is Ms. Murphy’s sister and had nothing to do with
the business. Petitioner also told respondent's agent that
Kathleen Murphy was an alias used by Ms. Murphy. Petitioner
further claimed that the business was subsequently acquired from
Kathleen Murphy by petitioner’s son, Michael Van Heemst, who was
then a high school student, at the end of 1987. Petitioner,
however, admitted that none of the purchase price called for in
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