- 20 - section 108(a). See also Firsdon v. United States, 95 F.3d 444 (6th Cir. 1996). Petitioners’ claim that Firsdon does not apply in the instant case because it did not address the election under section 1398(d)(2) is without merit for the reasons stated above. Respondent’s determinations in the notices of deficiency are presumed to be correct, and petitioners bear the burden of proving otherwise. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Petitioner listed on his bankruptcy schedules liabilities totaling $60.5 million, which greatly exceeds half of the 1991 NOL. Petitioners have not shown that any part of the 1991 NOL remained after the section 108 reduction. Accordingly, Decision will be entered for respondent.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Last modified: May 25, 2011