- 19 - Contrary to this assertion, however, the Schedule C, Profit or Loss From Business, attached to petitioners’ 1995 income tax return indicates that their used car business was on an accrual basis of accounting. Moreover, petitioners’ accountant explained that petitioners’ accounting method was not, in fact, a cash method but rather “a kind of a hybrid”. From the accountant’s testimony, it appears that for all years in issue, petitioners effectively reported income on an accrual basis, maintaining accounts receivable. Such receivables properly represent assets in a net worth analysis of a taxpayer who uses an accrual method of accounting. Cf. United States v. Vardine, 305 F.2d 60, 64 (2d Cir. 1962). Petitioners contend that the accounts receivable figures used in respondent’s net worth analysis are incorrect. Petitioners have failed, however, to offer credible evidence as to what the correct amount of their accounts receivable should be. In light of Jack’s testimony that he discarded any documents regarding accounts receivable once they were paid off, the dearth of evidence is unsurprising. Jack testified in conclusory fashion that petitioners’ net accounts receivable for 1993, 1994, and 1995 were $100,578, $77,999, and $47,880, respectively. Jack testified, without further explication, that these most recent figures “were taken directly from the sales contracts.”Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011