- 16 -
Commissioner, 897 F.2d 441, 444 (9th Cir. 1990), affg. T.C. Memo.
1987-522).
In applying these factors, we note that petitioner’s
education did not reflect a substantial background in tax or
financial matters. Petitioner’s role in the family finances was
largely limited to paying the family expenses. Petitioner
received money to pay those expenses from Mr. Campbell, who
deposited “$100,000 or so” from his trading profits every few
months.
Even though petitioner was the technical owner of the Refco
account that generated large profits in 1983, we find that she
was only a nominee and had no control over the funds in the
account. Petitioner’s only access to the account was from the
allowance she received from Mr. Campbell that he deposited in her
personal bank account. Petitioner stated that she never asked
him to deposit any money. Petitioner was aware that she received
a check issued to her in the amount of $1 million in 1982. Part
of the $1 million was used to purchase the family home in
Naperville, Illinois. However, Mr. Campbell explained in his
testimony that he took the money out of petitioner’s account to
buy the home. Petitioner had no involvement in Mr. Campbell’s
trading activities or in particular the London straddle. Mr.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011