-15-
c. Conclusion
Petitioner is a longtime C.P.A. who operated a bookkeeping
and accounting business in 1984. Petitioner's knowledge of
accounting, together with the other facts and circumstances,
including his forging his name on the Lopps' refund checks,
persuades us that a portion of the understatement of income tax
on his 1984 return was due to fraud. Laurins v. Commissioner,
889 F.2d 910, 913 (9th Cir. 1989), affg. Norman v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 1987-265; Considine v. United States, 683 F.2d at
1288. We conclude that respondent has proven by clear and
convincing evidence that part of the underpayment of tax for 1984
was due to petitioner's fraudulent failure to report income for
1984. Thus, we sustain the addition to tax under section
6653(b)(1).
4. Items Attributable to Fraud
For purposes of the addition to tax under section
6653(b)(2), respondent must prove the amount of the underpayment
that is due to fraud. Sec. 6653(b)(2)(A). We found that
petitioner had unreported income of $872,210 ($195,489 from four
refund checks and $676,721 of the land sale proceeds). However,
petitioner's failure to meet the burden of proof with respect to
this amount does not relieve respondent of the burden of proving
by clear and convincing evidence the amount of the underpayment
that is due to fraud for purposes of section 6653(b)(2).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011