Eugene Amos, Jr. - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                         
               not pursue any criminal action against Rodman concern-                 
               ing the Incident, that he will not cooperate should any                
               such action or investigation ensue, and that he will                   
               not encourage, incite or solicit others to pursue a                    
               criminal investigation or charge against Rodman con-                   
               cerning the Incident.                                                  
               Petitioner filed a tax return (return) for his taxable year            
          1997.  In that return, petitioner excluded from his gross income            
          the $200,000 that he received from Mr. Rodman under the settle-             
          ment agreement.                                                             
               In the notice that respondent issued to petitioner with                
          respect to 1997, respondent determined that petitioner is not               
          entitled to exclude from his gross income the settlement amount             
          at issue.                                                                   
                                       OPINION                                        
               We must determine whether the settlement amount at issue may           
          be excluded from petitioner’s gross income for 1997.  Petitioner            
          bears the burden of proving that the determination in the notice            
          to include the settlement amount at issue in petitioner’s gross             
          income is erroneous.3  See Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290             
          U.S. 111, 115 (1933).                                                       
               Section 61(a) provides the following sweeping definition of            
          the term "gross income":  "Except as otherwise provided in this             


               3Petitioner does not contend that sec. 7491(a) is applicable           
          in this case.  Even if petitioner had advanced such a contention,           
          he has not established that he has complied with the applicable             
          requirements of sec. 7491(a)(2).  Under the circumstances pre-              
          sented in this case, we conclude that the burden of proof does              
          not shift to respondent under sec. 7491(a).                                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011