-6-
residence. Petitioner did not testify at trial or call any other
witness to identify the Transamerica document. To authenticate a
document, the proponent must offer evidence sufficient to support
a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent
claims. See Fed. R. Evid. 901(a). Petitioner could not
authenticate the document because he refused to testify, and so
it was not admissible. Also, petitioner did not exchange the
document 15 days before trial as required by our standing
pretrial order served on him on May 13, 1998. Materials not
provided in compliance with our standing pretrial order may be
excluded from evidence. See Rules 104(c)(2), 132(b); Moretti v.
Commissioner, 77 F.3d 637, 644 (2d Cir. 1996). Even if we had
admitted the document, it would not have establish how or that
petitioner and Ploe split the proceeds. Petitioner offered no
evidence that the proceeds of the sale of the residence were
divided between petitioner and Ploe, or showing that he had less
gain than asserted by respondent. We conclude that petitioner
had a capital gain of $71,001 from the sale of the residence.
See secs. 1001(a), (c), 1221(1).
If a taxpayer sells his or her principal residence, and
within 2 years of the date of the sale buys and uses another
principal residence, gain from the sale is recognized only to the
extent that the taxpayer's adjusted sale price for the old
residence exceeds the cost of the new residence. Sec. 1034(a).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011