Steven Bruce Huntley - Page 3

                                        - 2 -                                         
               Respondent determined a deficiency of $5,259 in petitioner’s           
          2000 Federal income tax, and additions to tax of $232.87 and                
          $119.02 pursuant to section 6651(a)(1) and (2), respectively.               
               After concessions1, there are three issues for decision: (1)           
          Whether petitioner is entitled to a deduction stemming from a               
          brokerage account he held with Kristian Capital Management, Inc.;           
          (2) whether petitioner is entitled to a deduction stemming from             
          his employment with Howard Systems, Inc.; and (3) whether                   
          petitioner is liable for an addition to tax pursuant to section             
          6651(a)(1).                                                                 
                                     Background                                       
               The evidence in this case consists of oral stipulations                
          agreed upon at trial and documented evidence received at trial.2            
          The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are                      
          incorporated herein by reference.                                           
               At the time the petition was filed, petitioner resided in              
          Upper Darby, Pennsylvania.                                                  




          1 Respondent has conceded the issue as to addition to tax                   
          pursuant to sec. 6651(a)(2).                                                
          2 Respondent contacted petitioner no less than nine times                   
          between March 1, 2004, and November 1, 2005, each time requesting           
          that petitioner stipulate the facts of the case.  When no                   
          stipulation of facts was agreed upon by the date of the trial,              
          the Court took oral stipulations from the parties and received              
          into evidence documentation that detailed the parties’                      
          agreements.                                                                 




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011