James J. Coyle - Page 22

                                       - 21 -                                         
          credible witnesses.  Mr. Coyle admitted that he received the                
          receipts but did not keep them.  Mr. Coyle’s counsel explained              
          that Mr. Coyle “would reconcile his books and get with his tax              
          man at the end of the tax year, give this information to him, and           
          then, he had no need to keep these receipts.”  We are not                   
          convinced that an experienced businessperson such as Mr. Coyle              
          would not understand the need to keep receipts.  See Korecky v.             
          Commissioner, supra.                                                        
               Mr. Coyle hired Mr. Herman to prepare his Federal income tax           
          returns.  Mr. Herman testified that Mr. Coyle did not provide him           
          with many original records and documents when he was preparing              
          Regal’s and Mr. Coyle’s tax returns.  Rather, Mr. Coyle provided            
          him with totals of dollar amounts.  Mr. Herman’s testimony                  
          conflicts with Mr. Coyle’s testimony because Mr. Coyle had                  
          asserted that he provided receipts to Mr. Herman.  We are                   
          inclined to accept Mr. Herman’s testimony.                                  
               Mr. Coyle and respondent entered into an offer in compromise           
          for 1986, 1989, 1990, 1991, and 1992.  In a statement attached to           
          his offer in compromise, Mr. Coyle indicated that he was                    
          “employed as a mobile home salesman”.  From the facts in the                
          record, it is apparent that during many of those years Mr. Coyle            
          was not only an employee, but he was also a majority shareholder            
          with control over Regal.  Mr. Coyle’s dishonesty in his prior               
          dealings with respondent is an indication of fraud.                         

Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011