Albert M. Graham and Martha A. Graham - Page 40

                                       - 40 -                                         
               2.   Badges of Fraud                                                   
               Courts have developed several objective indicators, or                 
          "badges", of fraud.  Recklitis v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 874, 910            
          (1988).  The following badges of fraud are present in this case             
          as to petitioner for the years shown: (a) Substantially                     
          understating his income by diverting it to his children (1995,              
          1998, 1999), attorney (1998), C.P.A. (1998), and office manager             
          (1995, 1998); (b) concealing income from petitioners' tax return            
          preparer (1998); (c) having false or inadequate books and                   
          records; (d) creating false legal documents and concealing assets           
          from potential creditors (1995); (e) disguising personal expenses           
          as business expenses (1998, 1999); (f) concealing income through            
          complex series of transactions and nominees (1995, 1998); and (g)           
          giving implausible or inconsistent explanations to respondent’s             
          examiner and in court about events during the years in issue.               
                    a.   Substantially Understating Income                            
               A pattern of substantially underreporting income for several           
          years is strong evidence of fraud.  Holland v. United States, 348           
          U.S. 121, 137-139 (1954); Spies v. United States, 317 U.S. 492,             
          499 (1943).  Petitioners substantially underreported their income           
          in 1995, 1998, and 1999.                                                    
               Petitioner testified that he thought the partnership income            
          was not taxable to him because it was “vested” in the partnership           







Page:  Previous  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011