Estate of David J. Dickerson, Deceased, Dorothy Dickerson, Executor and Dorothy Dickerson, et al. - Page 39

                                       - 39 -                                         
          proof regarding his entitlement to such a loss carryforward nor             
          that such a loss would have reduced his income such that he would           
          not be required to pay estimated taxes.  Once again he makes                
          conclusory and unsupported arguments that fail to support his               
          burden of proof.  Respondent is sustained on this issue.                    
          Substantial Understatement Penalty--Michoff, Jr.                            
               Respondent determined an addition to tax of $2,095 under               
          section 6661 for the tax year 1988 for Michoff, Jr.  Section                
          6661(a) imposes an addition to tax of 25 percent of the amount of           
          any underpayment attributable to a substantial understatement of            
          tax.  An understatement is the difference between the amount                
          required to be shown on the return and the amount actually shown            
          on the return and is substantial if it exceeds the greater of (1)           
          10 percent of the tax required to be shown on the return for a              
          taxable year, or (2) $5,000.  Sec. 6661(b)(1) and (2)(A).  The              
          understatement is reduced to the extent that the taxpayer has (1)           
          adequately disclosed his or her position or (2) has substantial             
          authority for the tax treatment of an item.  Sec. 6661; sec.                
          1.6661-6(a), Income Tax Regs.  Petitioner has the burden of                 
          proving he is not liable for the addition to tax.  Rule 142(a).             
               The only argument of Michoff, Jr., is that he is not liable            
          for understating his taxes in 1988 and, thus, should not be                 
          charged with the substantial understatement addition to tax.                
          Based on our findings in this case, there was a substantial                 
          understatement, and, thus, respondent's determination is                    

Page:  Previous  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011