- 10 - damages were received on account of tortlike personal injuries. See Robinson v. Commissioner, supra at 126. The determination of the nature of the claim is factual and is made by reference to the settlement agreement in light of the surrounding circumstances. Id. A key question to ask is: “‘In lieu of what were the damages awarded?’” Id. (quoting Raytheon Prod. Corp. v. Commissioner, 144 F.2d 110, 113 (1st Cir. 1944), affg. 1 T.C. 952 (1943)). An important factor in determining the validity of the agreement is the intent of the payor. Id. at 127. Petitioners contend that section 7491, which was added to the Code by the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206, sec. 3001, 112 Stat. 726, shifts to respondent the burden of proof of the nature of the claim. Respondent, however, argues that petitioners have not satisfied the statutory requirements under section 7491 because petitioners neither cooperated with reasonable requests for information nor presented credible evidence. See sec. 7491(a)(1) and (2)(B). In this case, we need not decide whether petitioners have complied with the requirements of section 7491 because the resolution of this issue does not depend on which party has the burden of proof. We resolve this issue on the preponderance of the evidence in the record. Under the terms of the termination agreement, petitioner was awarded $2 million “in settlement of his claims for tortiousPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011