- 30 -
characterized the transfers back as “loans” to his corporations.
Petitioner did not report the receipt of the refunds as income,
and because he characterized the transfer of these amounts to the
corporations as loans, they would not be recorded as corporate
income. And given that these transfers were characterized as
loans, petitioner would be entitled to receive these amounts back
from the corporations as nontaxable loan repayments. Under these
circumstances, petitioner is not entitled to reduce his omitted
income by the amounts that he recorded as “loans”.
Petitioner also alleges that he advanced his personal funds
to purchase parts and equipment for use by Alviso or GMT.35 In
support thereof, petitioner provides the Court with photocopies
of checks made from bank accounts over which he had signatory
authority.36 In all, petitioner alleges that during the 3-year
period, he advanced Alviso and GMT more than $120,000 for which
he was never reimbursed. However, according to petitioner’s
brief, he is not absolutely sure of the purposes for some of
35For example, petitioner claims that in May 1990, he
purchased a hood for $2,000 using his personal American Express
card to pay for it. For support, petitioner presents only a
photocopy of a check for $4,260 made payable to American Express.
Petitioner admitted at trial that he wrote “Hood ? 2000" on the
memo line of the check after the check had cleared his bank.
36For example, on Aug. 10, 1989, petitioner paid $321 to
“DMV”; on Apr. 8, 1992, he paid $900 to “Rux Onito”; and on Aug.
3, 1992, he paid $1,250 to “Steve Micheles”.
Page: Previous 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011