Kenneth Lee Anderson and Carol Jane Anderson - Page 7

                                                 - 7 -                                                   

            years.  Respondent determined that all of that compensation is                               
            wage income except (1) $37,338 that Mr. Anderson received during                             
            1992 from Rancho Trucking, Inc. and American Containers Trans.                               
            and (2) $66,448 that he received during 1993 from Zip Truck                                  
            Lines, Inc., America Container Trans., and America Pacific                                   
            Forwarders, Inc., which respondent determined to be nonemployee                              
            compensation income subject to self-employment tax.  We sustain                              
            respondent's determinations regarding petitioner's wage income                               
            for the years 1992 through 1995.  However, petitioners denied                                
            that they owe any self-employment tax.  Consequently, the self-                              
            employment tax issue for 1992 and 1993 relating to the                                       
            compensation that respondent determined to be nonemployee                                    
            compensation income remains for adjudication, and respondent                                 
            agrees.                                                                                      
                  While the facts admitted or deemed admitted in this case                               
            establish that during 1992 Mr. Anderson sold real estate for                                 
            $275,000, they do not show whether or not he had any basis in                                
            that real estate and/or paid any commissions or other expenses                               
            relating to that sale.  Consequently, the issue relating to the                              
            gain, if any, for 1992 from that sale remains for adjudication.                              
                  The record in this case also shows that petitioners filed                              
            their return for each of the years 1992, 1993, and 1994 after the                            
            due date for each such return.  It does not establish any facts                              
            relating to whether such failure to file timely was due to                                   





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011