-7-
I. Burden of Proof
In general, the Commissioner’s determinations in the
deficiency notice are presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears
the burden of proving that the Commissioner’s determinations are
in error. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115
(1933). Petitioner did not assert that the burden shifted to
respondent under section 7491(a) and did not establish that she
fully complied with the requirements of section 7491(a)(2). We
therefore find that the burden of proof remains with petitioner,
except as otherwise conceded by respondent.5
II. Exclusion Under Section 104(a)(2)
We now consider whether petitioner may exclude the jury
award from gross income under section 104(a)(2).6 Gross income
generally includes all income from whatever source derived. Sec.
61(a). The definition of gross income is broad in scope.
Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426, 430 (1955).
Exclusions from gross income, however, are narrowly construed.
Commissioner v. Schleier, 515 U.S. 323, 328 (1995).
5Respondent concedes he has the burden of proof with respect
to the community property issue because he raised the issue for
the first time after petitioner filed the petition.
6We apply sec. 104(a)(2) as amended in 1996 by the Small
Business Job Protection Act of 1996 (SBJPA), Pub. L. 104-188,
sec. 1605(a), 110 Stat. 1838, effective generally for amounts
received after Aug. 20, 1996. That amendment, in relevant part,
added the modifier “physical” after “personal” and before
“injuries,” to clarify that amounts received on account of
personal injuries must be received for physical injuries and not
solely for emotional distress. Id.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011