- 29 -
that INI did not owe Burke a bonus. Later, petitioner caused INI
to make payments to Burke's estate in lieu of payments to be made
by petitioner personally. Petitioner characterized the payments
made by INI as a bonus to Burke’s estate, giving rise to a
deduction for INI and income to the estate. When Thorpe refused
to report the payments as a bonus on the estate’s tax returns,
petitioner recharacterized the payments from INI to Burke's
estate as constructive bonus payments to petitioner and filed
amended personal returns showing income therefrom. Thus,
petitioner has tried to adopt three different characterizations
of the payments he made, and the payments he caused INI to make,
in satisfaction of his obligations under the buy-sell agreement.
The only explanation for these recharacterizations is found in
petitioner’s attempts to change the tax consequences of the
transaction as originally agreed to by Burke and petitioner, and
confirmed by Thorpe and petitioner following Burke’s death.
Thorpe testified that petitioner then proposed a modification to
the deal "to avoid paying some taxes".
Third, following the delays occasioned by Cutshall’s refusal
to allow Becker to interview petitioner and her failures to
produce requested documents, petitioner, once he began to deal
directly with Becker, submitted documents that he had falsified.
Although a jury found petitioner not guilty of three misdemeanor
counts of submission of false statements to respondent, it is
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011