John Charles Treadaway, Sr. - Page 12




                                       - 12 -                                         
          portion of the deficiency (and the accuracy-related penalty) for            
          each of the years 1994 and 1995 that is attributable to determi-            
          nations in the notice with respect to that alleged separate                 
          property of Ms. Treadaway.  Petitioner also argues that he is not           
          liable for the portion of the deficiency (and the accuracy-                 
          related penalty) for each of the years 1994 and 1995 that is                
          attributable to the determinations in the notice disallowing the            
          net operating loss deduction claimed in the joint return for each           
          of those years.  That is because, according to petitioner, those            
          claimed net operating loss deductions were generated by the                 
          horse-training activities which petitioner maintains utilized               
          property and generated income that were the separate property of            
          Ms. Treadaway.                                                              
               Based on our examination of the record in this case, we find           
          that petitioner has failed to establish that any of the property            
          that petitioner claims was the separate property of Ms. Treadaway           
          did in fact constitute her separate property under the law of the           
          State of Arizona.                                                           
               Assuming arguendo that petitioner had established that the             
          property in question was the separate property of Ms. Treadaway,            
          on the record before us, we nonetheless reject petitioner’s                 
          position that he is not liable for the portion of the deficiency            
          (and the accuracy-related penalty) for each of the years at issue           
          that is attributable to respondent’s determinations which we                






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011