Alan and Esther Schwemmer - Page 4

                                        - 3 -                                         
          amounts of which respondent conceded at trial), other unexplained           
          bank deposits, flowthrough losses from the disregarded Sweetbush            
          Trust, and increased Social Security benefits.  Respondent                  
          further determined that petitioners were subject to self-                   
          employment tax, with a deduction for one-half of the self-                  
          employment tax.  Lastly, respondent determined that petitioners             
          were liable for the accuracy-related penalty under section                  
          6662(a).                                                                    
               Petitioners have the burden of proving that respondent’s               
          determination is incorrect.  Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290           
          U.S. 111, 115 (1933).  Section 7491 does not apply in this case             
          because petitioners did not cooperate with respondent during the            
          audit.                                                                      
               At trial, petitioners did not introduce any credible                   
          evidence.  Based on this record, we find that petitioners have              
          failed to meet their burden of proof.                                       
               At trial, respondent did not carry his burden of production            
          with respect to the section 6662(a) penalty.  Sec. 7491(c).                 
          Therefore, we do not sustain respondent’s determination that                
          petitioners were liable for a penalty under section 6662(a).                
               All of the arguments and contentions that have not been                
          analyzed herein have been considered, but do not require any                
          further discussion.                                                         
               Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011