- 6 -
Petitioner actually received total distributions from Berkeley
during 1997, that were not attributable to after tax employee
contributions, of $87,873.49, which exceeds the amount
petitioners included in income by $45,956.49. In the notice of
deficiency, respondent determined that petitioners failed to
report $45,955 in "U C Berkeley 1099R (3)" income. In other
words, petitioners failed to include in income a total of $45,955
from the three separate retirement distributions from Berkeley.3
Section 61(a) provides that gross income includes "all
income from whatever source derived," unless otherwise provided.
More specifically, section 61(a)(1), (9), and (11), respectively,
provides that gross income includes "compensation for services,
including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items";
"annuities"; and "pensions". A fundamental principle of tax law
is that income is taxed to the person who earns it, when he earns
it or derives it from property he owns. Commissioner v.
Culbertson, 337 U.S. 733, 739-740 (1949); Lucas v. Earl, 281 U.S.
111 (1930). Moreover, determining the ownership of property is a
question of fact, on which the taxpayer generally has the burden
of proof. Rule 142(a); Hang v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. 74, 80
3 The $1.49 difference between the $45,956.49 petitioner
received but failed to include in income and the $45,955
determined by respondent is not explained in the record.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011