Deborah K. Skyrms - Page 10

                                       - 10 -                                         
               Respondent argues7 that the underlying investment in this              
          case is similar to that in Provizer v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.             
          1992-177, affd. without published opinion 996 F.2d 1216 (6th Cir.           
          1993).  Petitioner in her brief represents that "This case is               
          substantially similar to" Zidanich v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.              
          1995-382 (underlying transactions and recyclers were the same as            
          those considered in Provizer v. Commissioner, supra).  Petitioner           
          distinguishes Provizer on bases other than the substance of the             
          underlying transaction.  We therefore assume that the underlying            
          transaction in this case is similar to that of Provizer, where we           
          held that the transaction was a sham and lacked economic                    
          substance.8                                                                 
               Petitioner contends that she was an "unsophisticated"                  
          investor with no "formal training or work experience in                     
          investments" and that she relied on Russell in making the                   
          investment.  She complains that she should not have to                      
          "independently investigate every detail of her investment".                 


          7Although we have characterized respondent's position as one                
          of argument, she considers it stipulated that the underlying                
          transactions here are analogous to those in Provizer v.                     
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-177, affd. without published                  
          opinion 996 F.2d 1216 (6th Cir. 1993).  Paragraph 2 of the                  
          stipulation of settled issues is ambiguous, but may be so                   
          interpreted.                                                                
          8Even absent this assumption it would be petitioner's burden                
          to prove the context in which the deductions and credits were               
          taken.  Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115                  
          (1933); Bixby v. Commissioner, 58 T.C. 757, 791-792 (1972).                 




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011