- 4 -
goods sold were computed; it is clear that there is no
documentation in support of these amounts, nor was there any
attempt by Mr. Poltonowicz to verify these items. At trial,
petitioners and Mr. Poltonowicz were unable to explain the
sources from which these items were derived.
Discussion
As a preliminary matter, we address Mrs. Haggart’s
contention at trial that Mr. Haggart was an employee of Roman
rather than a self-employed independent contractor. In this
context, the issue is peculiar because petitioners took the
position on their tax returns that Mr. Haggart was self-employed
and both Mr. Haggart and respondent agree that he was self-
employed. Additionally, Mrs. Haggart did not raise the issue in
the petition filed with this Court. Indeed, in the petition she
prayed that “Spouse seeks emancipation from taxpayer’s
responsibility for self-employment taxes.” The position taken in
the petition, therefore, assumes that there was a liability for
self-employment taxes, and certainly respondent was entitled to
assume this in preparing for trial. If we were to allow Mrs.
Haggart to raise this issue at this late time, respondent would
be unfairly prejudiced. See Toyota Town, Inc. v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2000-40, affd. sub nom. Bob Wondries Motors, Inc. v.
Commissioner, 268 F.3d 1156 (9th Cir. 2001). Accordingly, we
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011