- 10 - advance recovery and chargeback recovery balances, a check was not issued to the agent.” Based on the foregoing, and under the relevant tax law, Mrs. Harper would have had cancellation of indebtedness income at the time that monthly premiums were reclassified as earned income and/or any preexisting deficiency in her commission account was offset. See Diers v. Commissioner, supra; Cox v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-241; cf. Warden v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1988- 165. Therefore, the Court holds that petitioners received commission income in the amount of $1,125.93 in 2003. Petitioners also contest inclusion of the amounts listed on the Form 1099 at issue on the grounds that Mrs. Harper had stopped selling policies for Primerica sometime in the fall of 2002, and, accordingly, she could not have made any sales from which commissions could be generated in 2003. Petitioners testified that despite their repeated requests to Primerica regarding the exact circumstances by which the figures reflected in the 2003 monthly statements were derived, they had not been able to ascertain the exact nature of these amounts. Based on the entire record before us, we are not convinced either that Mrs. Harper ended her affiliation with Primerica in November of 2002, or that (assuming that she did not actually sell any policies in 2003) Primerica did not account for policies that she sold in 2002 on its 2003 monthly reports. First, Mrs.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NextLast modified: November 10, 2007