- 12 -
and without restriction as to its disposition.6 Healy v.
Commissioner, 345 U.S. 278, 281-282 (1953); United States v.
Lewis, 340 U.S. 590, 591 (1951); N. Am. Oil Consol. v. Burnet,
286 U.S. 417 (1932).7 The claim of right doctrine results in
part from the requirement to account for income annually. Healy
v. Commissioner, supra at 281; United States v. Lewis, supra at
592; Burnet v. Sanford & Brooks Co., 282 U.S. 359, 363 (1931).
The burden of proving a factual issue relating to liability
for tax shifts to the Commissioner under certain circumstances.
Sec. 7491(a). Petitioner does not contend that section 7491
applies. Thus, petitioner bears the burden of proof. See Rule
142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).
2. Whether the Payments at Issue Are Taxable in the Years
Received
We next consider petitioner’s argument that, under the claim
of right doctrine, petitioner is excused from the general rule
that income is taxable in the year in which the taxpayer receives
6 See generally Lister, “The Use and Abuse of Pragmatism:
The Judicial Doctrine of Claim of Right”, 21 Tax L. Rev. 263
(1966).
7 In N. Am. Oil Consol. v. Burnet, 286 U.S. 417, 424
(1932), the Supreme Court articulated the claim of right doctrine
as follows:
If a taxpayer receives earnings under a claim of right
and without restriction as to its disposition, he has
received income which he is required to return, even
though it may still be claimed that he is not entitled
to retain the money, and even though he may still be
adjudged liable to restore its equivalent.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011