- 15 - 1. Claimed Selling Expenses Petitioner argues that $13,873 of claimed selling expenses should be netted from the gross amounts transferred to him by ACT. The record is largely silent about these claimed selling expenses, who incurred them, when, or why. Petitioner’s position here is inconsistent with his concession in Briggs v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-380, that the full $199,490 is includable in his gross income. In Briggs, petitioner did not claim any deduction or offset for the $13,873 of claimed selling expenses. As previously noted, petitioner has agreed to be bound by the record compiled in Briggs. Petitioner has failed to establish his entitlement to any offset for selling expenses here. 2. Amounts Attributable to Covenant Not To Compete Petitioner argues that $82,600 of the transfers in question, representing one-fourth of the $330,400 initial payment from JSL with respect to the $500,000 agreed-upon consideration for the covenant not to compete, represents his own income rather than a transfer from ACT. We disagree. The UFTA defines “Transfer”, in relevant part, as “every mode, direct or indirect, * * * of disposing of or parting with 12(...continued) See Powers Photo Engraving Co. v. Commissioner, 17 T.C. 393 (1951), remanded on other grounds 197 F.2d 704 (2d Cir. 1952); Griffiths v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-637.Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011