- 55 -
determine what portion of the bad debt deduction claimed on
petitioner's return is attributable to fraud.
The record is devoid of any evidence of loans being made to
or by the partnerships. Meeks advised petitioner that he would
have to file amended partnership returns to reflect the discharge
of indebtedness income in order to claim the deduction.
Petitioner knew that the deduction was improper and
unsupportable. Petitioner did not follow the advice of his tax
adviser. We conclude that the claimed deduction was for the sole
purpose of evading tax.
Accordingly, on the basis of the record, we hold that the
amount of $2,035,424 which petitioner claimed as a bad debt
deduction was fraudulent in its entirety.
(6) The Ford Van
As indicated, Forster presented petitioner with a personal
check in the amount of $7,800, payable to a Ford dealership, to
enable petitioner to purchase a van. Petitioner failed to report
this amount in income on his 1982 return. Respondent asserts
that the entire $7,800 is attributable to fraud.
We hold that petitioner's failure to report the $7,800 on
his 1982 return is fraudulent. Forster did not present the check
to petitioner as a gift. Rather, petitioner coerced Forster by
threatening to cancel Newtowne's project if Forster refused to
Page: Previous 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011