- 27 -
Runkle declared that she considered the conference concluded.
Further, petitioners insisted on taping the interview, and Mr.
Runkle insisted on the revenue agent’s telling Mr. Runkle what
Code section required him to file tax returns. Revenue Agent
Andrews testified that he found this questioning, in the presence
of four witnesses who refused to identify themselves, to be
intimidating.
Neither petitioner produced any documents or records to
Revenue Agent Andrews during the course of his examination for
1991, 1992, and 1993. After concluding that petitioners would
not comply with his requests, Revenue Agent Andrews had to resort
to contacting third parties to verify income information and,
after referring each petitioner’s case to respondent’s Criminal
Investigation Division, petitioners continued their tactics of
failing to attend meetings that necessitated Special Agent Fabian
to issue third-party summonses. Petitioners on no less than four
separate occasions filed petitions to quash respondent’s
summonses and prevent respondent’s access to this information. A
taxpayer’s efforts to quash the Commissioner’s summonses may be
indicia of fraudulent intent when the taxpayer otherwise refuses
to cooperate with the Commissioner. Wedvik v. Commissioner, 87
T.C. 1458, 1470 (1986).
Mr. Runkle also sought to dissuade third parties from
complying with the summonses by threatening to sue the third
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011