- 8 - until faced with the prospect of criminal prosecution. As evidenced by the applications he filed with Abingdon, petitioner was aware that he had substantial gross income from his dental practice. When petitioner finally did file tax returns for the years in issue, he understated his aggregate gross income by approximately $268,264. Petitioner maintained no books and records of his income and expenses. According to undisputed testimony of respondent’s special agent, petitioner indicated during the criminal investigation that he had avoided investing in assets such as real estate that he believed the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) could seize in collection of back taxes. Instead, he invested in assets such as gold and silver bars and a Swiss annuity that he believed the IRS could not seize. Such statements are inconsistent with any good-faith misunderstanding of the tax laws that could negate fraud. Cf. Niedringhaus v. Commissioner, 99 T.C. 202, 217 (1992). Although petitioner attended trial, he declined the opportunity to testify and failed to introduce any evidence. We draw an adverse inference from petitioner’s silence and take it into account as a factor to be considered in combination with all the other evidence in the record. See Sherrer v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-122. On the basis of all the evidence, we conclude that petitioner is liable for the section 6651(f) addition to tax forPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011