- 5 -
Burton Kanter is a tax attorney, and petitioner was his
executive secretary from March 1962 to June 1970. Mr. Kanter
advised petitioner to participate in Degree, and she relied
solely upon his advice in making her decision to do so. Mr.
Kanter has no experience in the development, operation,
marketing, or appraisal of energy management systems.
Petitioner's participation in Degree was not motivated by a
desire for economic profit. She participated in Degree solely
for tax reasons.
Discussion
We review respondent’s determination that petitioner is
subject to sections 6621(c) and 6659. Petitioner, as the
taxpayer, bears the burden of disproving that determination. See
Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). In
order to meet her burden of proof, petitioner must introduce
sufficient evidence to: (1) Make a prima facie case establishing
that respondent committed the errors alleged in the petition and
(2) overcome the evidence submitted by (or otherwise favorable
to) respondent. See Lyon v. Commissioner, 1 B.T.A. 378, 379
(1925). The fact that the case was submitted to the Court fully
stipulated under Rule 122 does not change or otherwise lessen
petitioner’s burden. See Borchers v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. 82,
91 (1990), affd. on other issues 943 F.2d 22 (8th Cir. 1991).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011