- 7 - trial.3 It is clear from the permanent stipulation that the manufactured home was given to Ms. Brownell in a division of property following the termination of their personal relationship. It is also clear that the intent behind the agreement to transfer the home was to provide Ms. Brownell and petitioner’s own children with a residence after they were required to leave petitioner’s residence. Furthermore, the terms of the permanent stipulation established a lien on the property in favor of petitioner for a number of years after the transfer to Ms. Brownell. Because the lien caused Ms. Brownell to have only a limited interest in the manufactured home, the existence of such a lien is inconsistent with an intent by petitioner to provide Ms. Brownell with compensation for past services. Finally, petitioner in prior years had issued Ms. Brownell Forms W-2 for the compensation which he paid to her, and on his 1998 Federal income tax return he reported wage expenses of $33,576. However, petitioner did not issue a Form W-2 for the manufactured home, and on his 1998 return he characterized the cost of the manufactured home as a cost of goods sold rather than as wages. This is further evidence that petitioner did not intend at that 3Petitioner also provided a written statement from Ms. Brownell--signed on the day before this case was tried and apparently prepared by petitioner’s accountant--which in essence recites the events as petitioner portrayed them at trial. We do not accept this statement as reliable evidence of petitioner’s intent at the time the manufactured home was purchased and given to Ms. Brownell.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011