-2-
decide, after concessions,3 whether petitioners received income
in 2000 when petitioner Jean-Remy Facq4 (Mr. Facq) exercised his
stock options through a margin account and whether petitioners
are liable for the accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(a)
for 2000. We hold that petitioners received income in 2000 when
Mr. Facq exercised his stock options, but petitioners are not
liable for the accuracy-related penalty for 2000.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The parties agree that there is no genuine issue of material
fact regarding the stock option income issue and that decision
may be made as a matter of law. The facts regarding the
accuracy-related penalty have been fully stipulated pursuant to
Rule 122.5 The stipulation of facts and the accompanying
exhibits are incorporated by this reference. Petitioners resided
in Kirkland, Washington, at the time they filed the petition.
2(...continued)
determined that petitioners were liable for a $14,702.40
accuracy-related penalty for 2001. The parties have resolved all
issues relating to 2001 in a stipulation of settled issues, and
we shall not consider this year further.
3Petitioners have conceded certain arguments petitioners
made in their petition with respect to the taxability of the
transaction at issue in this case.
4Petitioner Jennifer Huff-Facq (Mrs. Facq) is a petitioner
in this case because she filed a joint income tax return with her
husband, Jean-Remy Facq, for 2000.
5This case was originally before the Court on the parties’
motions for partial summary judgment as to the stock option
income issue. At the hearing on the parties’ motions, the
parties informed the Court that the accuracy-related penalty
portion of this case could be fully stipulated for decision.
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