- 3 -
The issues for our consideration are: (1) Whether
petitioner constructively received income from illegal espionage
activities during 1985, when it was allegedly promised and/or set
aside for him, or when it was received and/or deposited in his
bank accounts during the taxable years 1989, 1990, 1991, and 1992
in the amounts of $745,000, $65,000, $91,000,2 and $187,000,
respectively; (2) whether petitioner is liable for the accuracy-
related penalty for taxable years 1989 through 1992; (3) whether
petitioner is constitutionally protected by the Double Jeopardy
Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution from the
assessment and/or collection of any tax or civil penalties
arising from espionage activity for which he was convicted and
incarcerated; (4) whether the work product doctrine may be
interposed by respondent in this case to prevent the turnover of
respondent’s counsel’s criminal reference letter; and (5) if the
work product privilege applies, whether petitioner has shown
substantial need so as to vitiate respondent’s assertion of the
privilege.
2 Although there was a discrepancy in the notice of
deficiency over the amount of income that petitioner allegedly
failed to report in 1991, respondent used $91,000 for purposes of
calculating the amount of the deficiency. Therefore, we will use
that number for purposes of this opinion.
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