- 20 -
(3) closed the trial record, (4) invited, but did not require,
the parties to file posttrial briefs, and (5) set a schedule for
the filing of briefs. Only respondent filed a posttrial brief.
In his posttrial brief, respondent continued to argue that some
of petitioner’s alleged business expenses should be disallowed
but, with regard to certain expenses, asserted grounds for the
disallowance that were different from the ground asserted in the
notices of deficiency.
OPINION
I. Schedule C Income and Deductions
A. Burden of Proof
Normally, in a case before this Court, the taxpayer bears
the burden of proof. Rule 142(a).11 That burden has often been
interpreted to mean that the taxpayer bears the ultimate burden
of persuasion; i.e., the risk of nonpersuasion, as well as the
initial burden of production. See, e.g., Gerling Intl. Ins. Co.
v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 468, 476 n.5 (1986).
In this case, petitioner bears the burden of proof. Rule
142(a). Because petitioner bears the burden of proof, petitioner
has the initial burden of production, which requires her to
11Under certain circumstances, sec. 7491(a)(1), which was
enacted in 1998, shifts the burden of proof to respondent. Sec.
7491 applies to court proceedings arising in connection with
examinations beginning after July 22, 1998. Because the
examination of petitioner’s returns commenced before July 23,
1998, sec. 7491(a)(1) is inapplicable to this case.
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011