- 15 -
amount of discretionary expenditures shown by the Form 433-A and
the bank statements is unexplained and leaves the record
ambiguous as regards petitioner’s basic living expenses or her
ability to meet them.
Similarly, the record contains no evidence of any illness,
medical condition, or disability that would render petitioner
incapable of earning a living or would exhaust all of her
financial resources. Although on brief petitioner references
uninsured medical expenses incurred in 2002, such uncorroborated
information never raised in the administrative proceeding falls
short of revealing any abuse of discretion. See Magana v.
Commissioner, 118 T.C. 488, 493 (2002) (considering “only
arguments, issues, and other matters that were raised at the
collection hearing or otherwise brought to the attention of the
Appeals Office”).
Turning to petitioner’s assets, we note at the outset that
no dispute between the parties exists as to whether the trust is
reachable for collection of petitioner’s Federal tax liabilities.
Further, this view would appear to accord with relevant
authorities. State law determines the existence of property
rights to which Federal tax consequences, such as a tax lien, may
then attach. Aquilino v. United States, 363 U.S. 509, 512-514
(1960); Magavern v. United States, 550 F.2d 797, 800 (2d Cir.
1977). As this Court has recognized, the court in In re
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