- 6 - correct, and petitioners bear the burden of proving that respondent's determination is erroneous. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Issue 1. Whether the Amounts Reported by Petitioners as Royalties Are Gross Receipts From Petitioner's Trade or Business The instant case is almost identical factually to Abraham v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1988-412. In holding that the payments3 to the taxpayer in Abraham for sales made by his down-line distributors were self-employment income, this Court focused on the activities the taxpayer performed in his business. We found that the taxpayer, realizing that his income was dependent upon the sales activities of his distributors, devoted substantial time and energy to training and developing these individuals. All of the taxpayer's activities, which included providing the distributors with motivation and encouragement, imparting to them his skills, knowledge, and experience with the products, and counseling them on selecting successful recruits, were conducted in an attempt to increase the productivity of the distributors at all levels. Therefore, the fact that the taxpayer had no personal contact with the down-line distributors at the second and lower levels made no difference; he devoted his time with the 3 In Abraham v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1988-412, the multilevel-marketing companies used the terms "bonus" or "commission payments" to describe the commissions they paid the taxpayer for the sales made by his down-line distributors.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011