- 205 - issue requiring the Court to apply a settled body of case law to essentially agreed facts. In contrast, assignment of the burden of proof and fixing the standard of proof have greater substantive significance with respect to harmless error analysis. As discussed in greater detail infra pp. 233-236, harmless error analysis ultimately requires the Court to consider whether the Sims-McWade misconduct affected the outcome in the trial of the test cases. Because the assignment of the burden of proof, and particularly the standard of proof, could influence the outcome of the Court's harmless error analysis, we will decide the issue. Proper placement of the burden of proof in these cases for purposes of the evidentiary hearing is not easily resolved and raises some perplexing questions. Rule 142(a) provides the general rule that the burden of proof (or burden of persuasion) will be upon the taxpayer, except as otherwise provided by statute or determined by the Court.92 See Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111 (1933). Normally, the taxpayer bears the initial burden of producing enough evidence to make a prima facie case; i.e., evidence to support a finding contrary to the Commissioner's determination. See Rockwell v. Commissioner, 512 92 Under sec. 3001 of the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206, 112 Stat. 726, Congress enacted new sec. 7491, which provides, effective with respect to examinations commenced after July 22, 1998, that the burden of proof shifts to the Commissioner when the taxpayer produces credible evidence in opposition to the Commissioner's determination of a deficiency and satisfies other requirements.Page: Previous 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011