Wallace R. Noel and Robinette Noel - Page 19

                                       - 19 -                                         
               At trial, petitioner and his C.P.A. testified that the                 
          $100,000 in miscellaneous expenses and the $5,797 in travel                 
          expenses were paid by petitioner as a stockholder of PMI.                   
          However, petitioner did not produce any records at trial to                 
          substantiate these claimed expenses.  A determination of basis is           
          a factual one, for which the burden of proof rests with peti-               
          tioner.  Hinckley v. Commissioner, 410 F.2d 937 (8th Cir. 1969),            
          affg. T.C. Memo. 1967-180.  Petitioner's self-serving testimony,            
          without any additional proof, fails to meet this burden.  Because           
          petitioner failed to substantiate his expenses, the miscellaneous           
          and travel expenses are not allowable items in computing peti-              
          tioner's basis in his PMI stock.                                            
               Petitioner argues on brief that $8,800 in accounting fees              
          should be included in the basis of his PMI stock.9  Petitioner              
          has failed to demonstrate that the accounting firm did any work             
          related to the PMI stock.  In her notice of deficiency, respon-             
          dent has allowed this $8,800 in fees as miscellaneous deductions.           
          Respondent's notice of deficiency is presumed correct.  Welch v.            
          Helvering, supra at 115.  Since petitioner failed to put on any             
          evidence, outside of his own testimony, as to the nature of the             
          accounting work, we find for respondent.                                    

          9Petitioner reported $1,637 of miscellaneous legal fees in                  
          the basis of his PMI stock.  Respondent, in her notice of                   
          deficiency, allowed these expenses as miscellaneous itemized                
          deductions.  Petitioner, in his reply brief, agreed that these              
          fees were properly accounted for in the notice of deficiency.               

Page:  Previous  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011