- 6 -
(1970). The Fifth Amendment privilege applies when the
possibility of self-incrimination is a real danger, not a remote
and speculative possibility. See Zicarelli v. New Jersey State
Commn. of Investigation, 406 U.S. 472, 478 (1972); Stubbs v.
Commissioner, 797 F.2d 936, 938 (11th Cir. 1986); Heitman v.
United States, 753 F.2d 33, 34-35 (6th Cir. 1984); Davis v.
United States, 742 F.2d 171, 172 (5th Cir. 1984); Moore v.
Commissioner, 722 F.2d 193, 195 (5th Cir. 1984), affg. T.C. Memo.
1983-20; Steinbrecher v. Commissioner, 712 F.2d 195, 197 (5th
Cir. 1983), affg. per curiam T.C. Memo. 1983-12; McCoy v.
Commissioner, 696 F.2d 1234, 1236 (9th Cir. 1983), affg. 76 T.C.
1027 (1981); Edwards v. Commissioner, 680 F.2d 1268, 1270 (9th
Cir. 1982). At trial, respondent stated that petitioner was not
under criminal tax investigation. Accordingly, petitioners'
claim of Fifth Amendment protection is misplaced because they
merely claimed the privilege without showing a danger of self-
incrimination.
Petitioners admit that for taxable years 1990, 1991, 1992,
1993, 1994, and 1995 they resided in Texas, a community property
State. For taxable years 1988 and 1989, petitioner testified
that he and his wife lived and worked in Washington State and
Oregon. Petitioners' time living in Washington State is
irrelevant to respondent's determinations, as it is also a
community property State. In any event, petitioners have not
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011