-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