Herbert L. Whitehead and Jennifer L. Whitehead - Page 46




                                       - 46 -                                         
               With respect to the parties’ dispute as to whether Ms.                 
          Whitehead performed services for Burien Nissan during the years             
          at issue, petitioners contend that those services included                  
          “performing administrative tasks, functioning as corporate                  
          Secretary, assisting with the transporting of vehicles when sales           
          promotions were conducted away from the dealership site and                 
          coordinating employee functions at two or more major events                 
          during the operating year.”38  In support of petitioners’ conten-           
          tion that Ms. Whitehead performed those services for Burien                 
          Nissan during the years at issue, petitioners rely on their self-           
          serving testimony.  We are not required to, and we shall not,               
          rely on Mr. Whitehead’s testimony.  Based on the Court’s evalua-            
          tion of Ms. Whitehead’s testimony, we are not required to, and we           
          shall not, rely on her testimony to establish that she performed            

               37(...continued)                                                       
          Burien Nissan automobiles, and that use had a value of $6,600.              
          Nevertheless, petitioners contend that that $6,600 constitutes              
          self-employment income attributable to Ms. Whitehead for 1996 and           
          to Mr. Whitehead for 1997.  It is not altogether clear why                  
          petitioners are claiming inconsistent treatment of the value of             
          Ms. Whitehead’s alleged services and use of certain Burien Nissan           
          automobiles for each year at issue.  However, as discussed below,           
          we believe that the reason for such inconsistent treatment is               
          that, in order to be entitled to a deduction for the entire                 
          $2,000 contribution to her IRA for 1996, Ms. Whitehead would have           
          to have received compensation for that year of at least $2,000.             
          In contrast, due to a change in the law, she would not have to              
          have received any compensation in order to be entitled to a                 
          deduction for the entire $2,000 contribution to her IRA for 1997.           
               38Petitioners concede that Ms. Whitehead did not have any              
          written agreement with respect to any services that petitioners             
          claim she performed for Burien Nissan during the years at issue.            





Page:  Previous  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011