- 12 -
Petitioner’s argument that Rule 91(f) could not be applied
without violating his Fifth Amendment privilege must be rejected.
The phrase that comes readily to mind was first used by the U.S.
Supreme Court in United States v. Sullivan, 274 U.S. 259, 264
(1927), to wit, a taxpayer may not “draw a conjurer’s circle
around the whole matter” of his or her tax liability. See also
Steinbrecher v. Commissioner, 712 F.2d 195, 198 (5th Cir. 1983),
affg. T.C. Memo. 1983-12; McCoy v. Commissioner, 696 F.2d 1234
(9th Cir. 1983), affg. 76 T.C. 1027 (1981); Edwards v.
Commissioner, 680 F.2d 1268 (9th Cir. 1982), affg. an unreported
decision of this Court; United States v. Carlson, 617 F.2d 518,
523 (9th Cir. 1980). In a civil tax case, the taxpayer must
accept the consequences of asserting the Fifth Amendment and
cannot avoid the burden of proof by claiming the privilege and
attempting to convert “the shield * * * which it was intended to
be into a sword”. United States v. Rylander, 460 U.S. 752, 758
(1983); see Steinbrecher v. Commissioner, supra; Traficant v.
Commissioner, 89 T.C. 501 (1987), affd. 884 F.2d 258 (6th Cir.
1989).
Petitioner also contends that respondent erroneously relied
on third-party information to determine that he had unreported
income for the years in issue. He has not, however, raised any
bona fide dispute as to the amounts reported on the third-party
documents. His arguments, as he was advised by respondent during
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011