- 11 -
subject to Federal income and self-employment tax, and the
payments made to petitioners by the Oneida Tribe from the
proceeds of its casino operations are subject to Federal income
tax, as determined by respondent.
Having invoked our jurisdiction by filing their petition,
petitioners may not unilaterally oust it. Estate of Ming v.
Commissioner, 62 T.C. 519 (1974). We therefore reject
petitioners’ claim that we lack jurisdiction with respect to any
aspect of this case.
Burden of Proof
Petitioners have neither claimed nor shown entitlement to a
shift in the burden of proof to respondent with regard to any
factual issue pursuant to section 7491(a). Accordingly,
petitioners bear the burdens of proof and production with respect
to all issues in this case, except as provided in section
7491(c). See Rule 142(a).
Judicial Officer Compensation
Respondent determined that the amounts Mrs. Doxtator
received as compensation for her services as a judicial officer
for the Oneida Tribe were subject to Federal income tax.
Petitioners contend that those amounts are exempt from tax.
It is well established that Native Americans, or American
Indians, as U.S. citizens are subject to the Federal income tax
unless an exemption is created by treaty or statute. Squire v.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011