- 27 -
such evidence exists given Mr. Norton’s limited knowledge of
respondent’s audit of the Pago Trust.23
In addition, petitioners did not present any testimony from
Mr. Boatright to establish that he authorized Mr. Izen to file
the petition for the McKenzie Trust, and they did not offer any
evidence that he later ratified Mr. Izen’s actions. The failure
to produce such evidence or available testimony leads us to
conclude that Mr. Boatright did not authorize or ratify the
filing of the petition for the McKenzie Trust. Wichita Terminal
Elevator Co. v. Commissioner, 6 T.C. 1158 (1946), affd. 162 F.2d
513 (10th Cir. 1947).
Petitioners rely solely on the Forms 56 and 2848 signed by
Mr. Norton and Mr. Boatright to establish our jurisdiction.
However, filing a Form 56 merely notifies respondent of a
fiduciary relationship and entitles the fiduciary to receive
communications regarding the tax matters specified therein. No
provision of Form 56 operated to create an agency relationship
23In addition, the record casts doubt on whether Mr. Norton
was still acting as trustee for the Pago Trust on Jan. 13, 2003,
when the petition was filed. Mr. Norton apparently attempted to
resign as trustee in April of 2001, but he did not tender his
official resignation until July 9, 2003. Although Mr. Norton’s
participation in the Pago Trust’s operation was negligible
throughout its existence, petitioners have not demonstrated that
he performed any acts as trustee after June 6, 2001, the date he
signed the Forms 56 and 2848, other than tendering his official
resignation.
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011