- 12 - testify on her behalf in that proceeding. Also, she was the person who dealt with the insurance company after it initially denied coverage for the loss of her house in 1982. The record reflects that petitioner dealt with third parties with respect to her family’s financial, tax, and legal matters. For example, respondent’s revenue officer who was assigned to the collection of the income tax liabilities of petitioner and Mr. Hopkins testified that, except for one occasion, he dealt almost exclusively with petitioner. When he would request information or a response from petitioner and Mr. Hopkins, it was always petitioner who would respond. Petitioner performed numerous financial functions within her family, exercised considerable discretion, and was ultimately responsible for the family’s principal asset, the house at 111 Diablo Drive. She spent considerable sums in remodeling the house before 1982 and in rebuilding the house after the mudslide in 1982.14 Petitioner directed the remodeling and rebuilding. She hired contractors, and she paid those individuals by check or in cash. Given the size of the partnership deductions, the change in petitioner and Mr. Hopkins’s reported taxes in 1980, 1982, and 1983, and petitioner’s involvement in the family’s financial 14The rebuilt residence included four bedrooms and four baths and occupied 4,976 square feet with a four-car, 920-square- foot carport.Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011