- 7 -
funds by the taxpayer, the taxpayer has the burden of proving
that all or part of those funds is not taxable. Tokarski v.
Commissioner, 87 T.C. 74, 76-77 (1986).
There is ample evidence linking petitioner to
income-producing activities. He received wages from Family Life,
capital gain and dividends from Phoenix Investment Partners,
Social Security benefits, and interest from the Arizona Central
Credit Union during the years in issue. At trial, respondent
submitted Forms W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, Forms 1099-MISC,
Miscellaneous Income, transcripts from the Social Security
Administration, employer records, and declarations under
penalties of perjury of petitioner’s employer and of a
representative for Phoenix Investment Partners as to the validity
of these underlying documents. The transcripts, declarations,
and supporting documents show that petitioner received income
during the years in issue. Thus, petitioner bears the burden of
proving respondent’s determinations are in error. See Edwards v.
Commissioner, supra; Weimerskirch v. Commissioner, supra.
2. Burden of Proof
At trial, respondent moved to amend the pleadings to conform
to the proof, asserting an increased deficiency and additions to
tax for 2000 as a result of respondent’s inadvertent failure to
include in petitioner’s income $830.31 of dividends from Phoenix
Investments in 2000. The parties may amend their pleadings only
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011