- 8 -
Johnson's finances. We have carefully reviewed the entire
stipulated record in this case and disagree with petitioner's
summation of the evidence. Statements in petitioner's brief are
not evidence, and we disregard them in making our decision. See
Rule 143(b); Bialo v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1132, 1140 (1987).
The facts in evidence probative on the issue of knowledge reveal
that Ms. Johnson knew Mr. Johnson owed the Internal Revenue
Service $30,000 as of January 8, 1988. On that date, which
preceded each of the five disbursements at issue, Ms. Johnson
signed and filed Mr. Johnson’s inheritance tax return for the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The return specifically stated
that Mr. Johnson owed $30,000 to the Internal Revenue Service.4
Ms. Johnson should have faithfully discharged her duties as
personal representative and paid the Internal Revenue Service the
$30,000 debt of which she was aware.
Petitioner also advances on brief several peripheral
arguments, none of which are meritorious. We reject petitioner's
suggestion that no personal liability can attach to Ms. Johnson
or her estate because the United States did not file a claim for
the taxes in the Probate Court. See New v. Commissioner, supra
at 677. We also reject petitioner's suggestion that the amounts
4While that return did not specify the year(s) and type of
taxes owed by Mr. Johnson, there is no evidence in this record
that Mr. Johnson owed any other taxes to the Internal Revenue
Service except for the ones at issue herein.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011