- 8 -
the burden of substantiating this basis. Rule 142(a); Welch v.
Helvering, supra.
A taxpayer’s characterization of an item on his income tax
return may be considered as an admission against interest on the
part of the taxpayer. Times Tribune Co. v. Commissioner, 20 T.C.
449, 452 (1953). Since petitioner’s original income tax return
listed the units with a zero basis, petitioner has not presented
any evidence regarding the basis of the partnership units, and
has therefore not satisfied his burden, we sustain respondent’s
determination.
B. Assignment of Income
Petitioner argues that the Securities Act prohibits
petitioner from depositing the purchasers’ checks into his own
account and using the money for his private use. Petitioner
states that the Act does not allow solicitation or advertisement
of the partnership units, and therefore there is no market for
the units and only Colorcom can sell the units. Petitioner also
argues that because Colorcom sold the units and informed the
purchasers that their investments would be used on the computer
project, it would be illegal for petitioner to keep the proceeds.
While the partnership units may be covered by the Act, the
units that were sold belonged to petitioner and not Colorcom. It
is well established that income remains taxable to a taxpayer
when he earns it or derives it from property he owns. Helvering
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011