- 6 -
using the BLS data. See id. We find that respondent's recon-
struction of petitioner's income using the BLS statistics was
reasonable under these circumstances.
Petitioner argues that respondent's determination is
arbitrary and excessive, and therefore respondent has the burden
of proving that he had taxable income. See Day v. Commissioner,
975 F.2d 534, 537 (8th Cir. 1992), affg. in part and revg. in
part T.C. Memo. 1991-140. Petitioner bears the burden of proving
that the determination is arbitrary and excessive. Id. While we
agree with some of petitioner's statements of the law, we
disagree with petitioner's conclusion as it applies to this
case.2
In certain cases, courts will not sustain a deficiency
determination unless there is some predicate evidence that the
taxpayer received income from an activity. United States v.
Janis, 428 U.S. 433, 441-442 (1976); Day v. Commissioner, supra
at 537; Anastasato v. Commissioner, 794 F.2d 884, 887 (3d. Cir.
1986), vacating T.C. Memo. 1985-101. The evidentiary foundation
2Petitioner also argues that we lack subject matter juris-
diction because the notice of deficiency was invalid. See Scar
v. Commissioner, 814 F.2d 1363 (9th Cir. 1987), revg. 81 T.C. 855
(1983). In this case, the notice of deficiency explains respon-
dent's determinations in detail, including the basis for, and
computation of, the income determinations. We therefore reject
this argument and conclude that the notice of deficiency is
valid. See Campbell v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 110 (1988).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011