- 14 - disagree. Respondent makes this argument even though, as we previously noted, RA Craddock testified that Vernon was forthcoming and did not do anything to hide or cover up issues RA Craddock raised. There is no evidence in the record that petitioners misled RA Craddock. 3. Personal Expenses Respondent contends that he established fraud by proving that Vernon and Janet paid personal expenditures with TECO funds, TECO deducted these personal expenses, and Vernon and Janet failed to report these amounts as income. Petitioners do not deny that TECO paid personal expenses of Vernon and Janet. In fact, Vernon was forthcoming and forthright in his testimony that TECO paid personal expenses of Vernon and Janet. As we noted supra, Janet credibly testified that she made an honest attempt to come up with the figures listed on the Forms 1099, and the parties stipulated that Vernon and Janet intended for the amounts listed on these Forms 1099 to cover the amount of personal expenses paid for, and withdrawals made by, Vernon out of TECO’s funds. If petitioners failed to list the exact amount of Vernon and Janet’s personal expenses paid for with TECO funds on the Forms 1099, we conclude that it was not due to fraud. 4. Remaining Badges of Fraud The remaining badges of fraud are understating income and filing false documents. The evidence does not establish thatPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011