Maureen Monsour - Page 65

                                        - 65 -                                        
          that the attribution positive factor set forth in section                   
          4.03(1)(f) of that revenue procedure is present in this case.  On           
          the record before us, we find for the reasons set forth in our              
          consideration of the attribution positive factor that petitioner            
          has failed to carry her burden of establishing (1) that no item             
          giving rise to a portion or all of the understatement for each of           
          the taxable years 1989, 1991, 1992, and 1993 and (2) that no                
          portion of the unpaid liability for 1990 are attributable to                
          herself.  On the record before us, we find that petitioner has              
          failed to carry her burden of establishing that the attribution             
          negative factor set forth in section 4.03(2)(a) of Revenue Proce-           
          dure 2000-15 is not present in this case.                                   
               With respect to the significant benefit negative factor set            
          forth in section 4.03(2)(c) of Revenue Procedure 2000-15, peti-             
          tioner makes no argument that that negative factor is not present           
          with respect to the taxable year 1990.  On the record before us,            
          we find that petitioner has failed to carry her burden of estab-            
          lishing that she did not significantly benefit beyond normal                
          support from the unpaid liability with respect to the taxable year          
          1990.                                                                       
               As for each of the taxable years 1989, 1991, 1992, and 1993,           
          petitioner argues that                                                      
               While it may be arguable that the Petitioner benefited                 
               by the reduced taxes and/or omitted income, those argu-                
               ments appear to be without merit * * * [based on] Peti-                
               tioner’s own testimony which stated that her lifestyle                 





Page:  Previous  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011