- 8 -
expenditures for the listed property were financed
“legitimately”, using funds from his parents, from loans, and
from lawful business ventures. Petitioner has failed to persuade
us that that is the case. For instance, petitioner testified
that his parents put up almost $9,000 towards the purchase of the
1985 Chevrolet Corvette. Petitioner’s father died before 1985,3
and neither his mother nor his stepfather testified at the trial
in this case. Petitioner’s mother worked as a secretary in the
service department of an automobile dealership, and petitioner
has given us no reason to believe that she had the wherewithal to
help him with that automobile purchase. Petitioner has not shown
that his mother and stepfather were unavailable, and we infer
from their failure to testify that their testimony would have
been negative to petitioner. McKay v. Commissioner, 886 F.2d
1237, 1238 (9th Cir. 1989), affg. 89 T.C. 1063 (1987); Wichita
Terminal Elevator Co. v. Commissioner, 6 T.C. 1158, 1165 (1946),
affd. 162 F.2d 513 (10th Cir. 1947). Likewise, we draw a
negative conclusion from petitioner’s failure to offer any
person’s testimony or other evidence to support certain loans
that petitioner claims account for the cash he expended in 1986
for certain of the listed property. Petitioner testified that
3 Although the date of death of petitioner's father is not
clear from the record, petitioner did not object to respondent's
proposed finding of fact to that effect. Rule 151(e)(3).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011