-14-
2. The Transaction With Ms. Stark
After Ms. Stark backed out of the three-way transaction, she
offered to sell the property Mr. Wickersham was interested in to
him at a reduced price. Mr. Wickersham later purchased Ms.
Stark's property at a reduced price.
3. Conclusion
Respondent's position on brief is that "While each of these
instances does not present technically inappropriate behavior,
petitioner's pattern of conduct resonates strongly in the context
of tax fraud." We agree with respondent that neither of these
transactions constituted inappropriate behavior; however, we
disagree with respondent's ultimate conclusion regarding these
transactions. While a taxpayer's entire course of conduct can be
indicative of fraud, see Stone v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 213, 223-
224 (1971); Otsuki v. Commissioner, 53 T.C. 96, 105-106 (1969),
we conclude that these two transactions are not a pattern of
fraudulent conduct by Mr. Wickersham, and they are not indicative
of fraud.
D. Mr. Wickersham's Credibility
Respondent argues that portions of Mr. Wickersham's
testimony are implausible and not credible. At trial, we had the
4(...continued)
And I said, Well, how are you going to do it? He
said, Well, I have some money on deposit there; I'll
just pledge it, and I won't even have to disturb the --
drawing the interest on it; I'll just make this extra
$1,500. So that was all right with me. I wrote him a
check for $1,500, and that's the way that came about.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011