- 53 - during the years at issue.46 The record belies Essie Whitehead’s testimony that she had the purported general arrangement with Mr. Whitehead during the years at issue that she described and that Mr. Whitehead acted in accordance with any such purported general arrangement. On the record before us, we find that petitioners have failed to show that Mr. Whitehead paid funds to Essie Whitehead during the years at issue subject to the requirement that she use those funds solely to make the monthly mortgage payment on the Kirkland property and not for any use she desired. On that record, we further find that petitioners have failed to show that Essie Whitehead used any portion of the amounts that Mr. White- head paid to her during the years at issue to make the monthly mortgage loan payment on the Kirkland property.47 Based on our examination of the entire record before us, we find that petitioners have failed to establish that they are entitled to a deduction for each year at issue for any mortgage interest and property taxes relating to the Kirkland property. Petitioners’ Claimed IRA Deduction Respondent determined to disallow the deduction that peti- 46Mr. Whitehead made no payments to Essie Whitehead in January 1996, May 1997, June 1997, and November 1997. 47In light of our findings, we shall not address respon- dent’s contention with respect to whether the mortgage interest at issue constitutes qualified residence interest under sec. 163(h)(3).Page: Previous 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011