- 14 -
that neither Mr. Drummond nor Ms. Drummond has established that
the determinations on which each has the burden of proof are
erroneous. Accordingly, we sustain those determinations except
to the extent that respondent's concession that Mr. Drummond's
income for 1983 is community property affects the determinations
for 1983 with respect to Mr. Drummond on which he has the burden
of proof.
We now turn to the fraud issue. In order for the additions
to tax for fraud under section 6653(b)(1) and (2) to apply,
respondent must prove by clear and convincing evidence that an
underpayment exists and that some portion of such underpayment is
due to fraud. See sec. 7454(a); Rule 142(b); Niedringhaus v.
Commissioner, 99 T.C. 202, 210 (1992). On the record before us,
we find that respondent has established by clear and convincing
evidence that each petitioner has an underpayment for each of the
years at issue.
To prove that an underpayment is attributable to the fraudu-
lent intent of a taxpayer, respondent must prove by clear and
convincing evidence that the taxpayer intended to evade taxes
that he or she believed to be owing by conduct intended to
conceal, mislead, or otherwise prevent the collection of such
4(...continued)
decided to file a joint brief. That brief contains numerous
statements and attachments which are not evidence in these cases
and which we consequently disregarded. See Rule 143(b).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011