- 4 -
McCauley, Jr. as reported to respondent on a Form 1041, Schedule
K-1, Beneficiary’s Share of Income, Deductions, Credits, etc.3
On August 29, 2003, respondent also issued to petitioner
Louise a notice of deficiency determining that in 2001 Louise
received $18,037 in demutualization compensation4 from Principal
Financial Group, Inc., Mellon Investor Services (Mellon) as
reported to respondent on Form 1099-B, Proceeds from Broker and
Barter Exchange Transactions 2001, and $343 in interest income
from Principal Life Insurance Company (Principal) as reported to
respondent on Form 1099-INT, Interest Income, and $12 in interest
income from Desert Schools Federal Credit Union as reported on
Form 1099-INT.5 None of the payors withheld any Federal income
tax from either Terry’s or Louise’s reported income. Petitioners
3 Respondent did not address these amounts on brief or at
trial. As addressed, infra p. 16, respondent’s “presumption of
correctness” with respect to the determination is appropriate
where respondent has furnished evidence linking the taxpayer to
the “tax generating activity.” Gold Emporium, Inc. v.
Commissioner, 910 F.2d 1374, 1378 (7th Cir. 1990), affg. Malicki
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1988-559. Respondent did not provide
any third party payor information or any other evidence linking
these amounts to petitioner. Thus, the Court deems that
respondent has conceded these amounts.
4 See infra p. 20.
5 With respect to the amount received from Desert Schools
Federal Credit Union, respondent did not address this amount on
brief or at trial or provide any third party payor information.
The Court assumes that respondent has conceded this amount. See
also supra note 3.
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