- 2 -
report his distributive share of partnership income for the 1998
taxable year despite the fact that his distributive share of that
income was not actually distributed to him but is being held in
escrow because of a dispute with his former partner; (2) whether
respondent correctly calculated that distributive share; and (3)
whether petitioner is entitled to deduct certain business
expenses. After considering respondent’s motion and petitioner’s
response, we conclude that there remain no issues of material
fact that require trial. For the reasons stated below, we will
grant respondent’s motion for summary judgment and deny
petitioner’s motion for partial summary judgment. Unless
otherwise indicated, all Rule references are to the Tax Court
Rules of Practice and Procedure, and all section references are
to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended.
Background
At the time of filing the petition, petitioner resided in
West Roxbury, Massachusetts.
Petitioner is an attorney, admitted to practice in
Massachusetts and before the United States Tax Court, and a
certified public accountant. On October 13, 1993, petitioner
formed a partnership (the partnership) with Jeffrey Cohen, named
“Cohen & Burke”, to practice law and prepare tax returns.
Shortly after formation, the partnership purchased a tax
preparation practice owned by the estate of Mr. Cohen’s father.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011