- 31 -
allowing petitioner expenses of $8,672 listed on the Form 433-A--
a figure provided on the Form 433-A and not entirely
substantiated by underlying evidence--petitioner had $936 per
month (approximately $11,232 per year) available to pay toward
the outstanding tax liability.
We note that, at trial, Mr. Bartak claimed that the amount
of monthly wages should have been listed as $1,400 as opposed to
the $1,561 listed on the Form 433-A. Even if we were to accept
this figure, based on petitioner and Mr. Bartak’s 2001 return, it
appears that they understated the amount of their monthly income.
The Form 433-A reflects $200 per month of interest and dividend
whereas their 2001 return reported $5,621 of taxable interest
(i.e., approximately $468 per month) and $1,551 of dividend
income (i.e., approximately $129 per month). The 2001 return
also reported $6,005 of Schedule E income (i.e., approximately
$500 per month) which is not reflected on the Form 433-A. If we
11(...continued)
$9,014 for the checking accounts, $46,689 for the “other”
accounts, $408,388 for the Form 433-A investments (the 100
percent fair market value of the other investments (the $285,872
listed 70 percent value adjusted to 100 percent--i.e., $285,872
divided by 70 percent equals $408,388), $1,696 for the cars
($31,915 minus the outstanding debt of $30,219) and $208,807 for
the equity in their home (based on a fair market value of
$295,738, as listed on their tax bill, minus the outstanding debt
of $86,931). The amount listed on their real estate tax bill
appears to represent fair market value. Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code
secs. 110, 110.5, 401 (West 1998). This figure does not include
the $39,000 of credit petitioner listed as available on the Form
433-A.
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011