- 4 - penalty upon the ground that the underpayment of tax required to be shown on petitioners’ 2003 return is a substantial understatement of income tax. Discussion It is clear, and the parties agree, that the IRA distribution was made from an account described in section 408(a). They further agree that the IRA distribution is subject to tax as provided in section 72. See sec. 408(d)(1). Section 72(a) requires that the IRA distribution be included in petitioner’s income to the extent it exceeds petitioner’s “investment in the contract”. See secs. 72(b)(1), (c), 408(d)(2). Following trial, the Court held the record open so that any question regarding petitioner’s investment in the contract in the IRA account could be resolved. As it turns out, petitioner’s investment in the contract, within the meaning of the relevant statutes, was zero as of the close of 2003. At trial petitioners took the position that $40,000 of the IRA distribution was excludable from their 2003 income because that amount was “rolled over” into a different qualifying account. They are mistaken on the point. Although petitioner used $40,000 of the IRA distribution to open a time deposit account, the transaction was not a “rollover contribution” asPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NextLast modified: March 27, 2008