Steven R. Olmos - Page 7




                                        - 7 -                                          
               Generally, a taxpayer bears the burden of proving the                   
          Commissioner’s determinations incorrect.4  Rule 142(a); Welch v.             
          Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).  However, the Court of                  
          Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, the Circuit to which appeal in                
          this case would lie absent stipulation otherwise,5 has held:                 
          “The law imposes much less of a burden upon a taxpayer who is                
          called upon to prove a negative--that he did not receive the                 
          income which the Commissioner claims--than it imposes upon a                 
          taxpayer who is attempting to sustain a deduction.”  Weir v.                 
          Commissioner, 283 F.2d 675, 679 (6th Cir. 1960), revg. T.C. Memo.            
          1958-158; see also United States v. Walton, 909 F.2d 915, 918-919            
          (6th Cir. 1990); United States v. Besase, 623 F.2d 463, 465 (6th             
          Cir. 1980); Richardson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-69.  In              
          cases involving unreported income, the Commissioner bears the                
          initial burden of establishing “at least a ‘minimal’ factual                 
          predicate or foundation of substantive evidence linking the                  

               4  Petitioner does not argue that sec. 7491(a) operates to              
          shift the burden of proof to respondent.  Even if petitioner had             
          so argued, the burden of proof would not shift under sec. 7491(a)            
          because petitioner has not shown he maintained any records, nor              
          has he cooperated with the reasonable requests of respondent                 
          during the administrative proceedings or in preparation for                  
          trial.                                                                       
               5  While petitioner apparently resided in California during             
          2001, he resided in Niles, Ohio, when he filed his petition and              
          amended petition.  Sec. 7482(b)(1)(A) provides that reviewable               
          decisions of the Tax Court are appealable to the Circuit in which            
          the taxpayer resides at the time the petition was filed.                     
          Therefore, this case is appealable to the Court of Appeals for               
          the Sixth Circuit.                                                           






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007