Daniel E. Spurlock - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         
          States v. Walton, 909 F.2d 915, 918 (6th Cir. 1990).  The                   
          taxpayer bears “the initial burden of producing credible evidence           
          that [he] did not earn the taxable income * * * or of presenting            
          an argument that the IRS deficiency calculations were not                   
          grounded on a minimal evidentiary foundation.”  Id. at 919.5                
               At trial and on brief, petitioner has not argued that he did           
          not receive compensation for his services during the years at               
          issue or did not receive early IRA distributions in 1995 and                
          1997.  Construing petitioner’s argument to be that respondent’s             
          determination lacked a minimal evidentiary foundation and was               
          therefore arbitrary, we conclude that petitioner has not met his            
          initial “burden of production on the issue of arbitrariness.”               
          Id. at 922.                                                                 
               Petitioner testified only as respondent’s witness.  His                
          testimony did not credibly support his case:  while feigning                
          improbable memory lapses as to other income sources, petitioner             



               5 United States v. Walton, 909 F.2d 915 (6th Cir. 1990),               
          involved the Commissioner’s net-worth reconstruction of the                 
          taxpayer’s alleged unreported income.  The court held that                  
          although the Government had failed to offer any evidentiary                 
          foundation for a disputed element of the net-worth computation,             
          the taxpayer had nevertheless failed to meet his initial “burden            
          of production on the issue of arbitrariness.”  Id. at 922.                  
          Noting that the taxpayer had failed to elicit evidence as to how            
          the Commissioner had arrived at the disputed item or to bring               
          other relevant evidence to the trial court’s attention, the court           
          concluded that the taxpayer’s “vague denial * * * [of the                   
          disputed item] was certainly not sufficient to meet [his] burden            
          of production on the issue of arbitrariness.”  Id.                          





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

Last modified: May 25, 2011