Jerry and Patricia A. Dixon, et al. - Page 12

                                       - 101 -                                        
          hand, maintain that the Thompson settlement covered a number of             
          years between 1979 and 1993, thereby increasing the percentage              
          reduction in Kersting deficiencies to which they are entitled to            
          79.95 percent.57  They base this percentage on their calculation            
          that, absent the settlement, the amount of taxes the Thompsons              
          would have paid respondent for the taxable years 1979-1983, 1986-           
          87, and 1993 was $143,894.10, while the amount they actually paid           
          was $28,894.87 ($30,000 reduced by $1,105.13 that respondent                
          maintains Mr. Thompson improperly received as reimbursement for             
          his travel to Hawaii to testify in the Dixon II trial).  We                 
          examine various suspect benefits below.58                                   

          57In a separate brief, petitioners’ counsel Sticht argues                   
          for a “cashflow” approach to the calculation of the reduction               
          percentage, which would bring the initial reduction percentage to           
          86.8 percent of petitioners’ aggregate deficiencies, additions,             
          and interest.  Without closely following the mechanics of                   
          Sticht’s calculation, we reject the cashflow approach out of                
          hand.  It completely disregards the time value of money                     
          principles that underlie our Preliminary Comments.  See text                
          accompanying notes 38, 39, and 40, supra.                                   
               We also note that, in the course of the evidentiary hearing            
          required by the Dixon V mandates, petitioners’ counsel O’Donnell            
          and Jones filed motions for summary judgment of “100-percent                
          discount” as a sanction.  We denied the motions and the motions             
          for reconsideration of our denials because of numerous                      
          outstanding issues of material fact.  With the completion of the            
          evidentiary hearing and issuance of our opinion herein, we now              
          regard petitioners’ motions to characterize the Thompson                    
          settlement as a 100-percent reduction in the Kersting-related               
          deficiencies as having been denied on the merits.                           
          58We note that petitioners do not question the settlement of                
          the Thompsons’ 1978 tax year, which was apparently the first year           
          for which the Thompsons claimed Kersting deductions.  In any                
                                                             (continued...)           





Page:  Previous  91  92  93  94  95  96  97  98  99  100  101  102  103  104  105  106  107  108  109  110  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011