VALDES v. COMMISSIONER

2004 T.C. Summary Opinion 19, 2004 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 21
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedFebruary 25, 2004
DocketNo. 2357-00S
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2004 T.C. Summary Opinion 19 (VALDES v. COMMISSIONER) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
VALDES v. COMMISSIONER, 2004 T.C. Summary Opinion 19, 2004 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 21 (tax 2004).

Opinion

RENE D. AND ROSEMARY S. VALDES, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
VALDES v. COMMISSIONER
No. 2357-00S
United States Tax Court
T.C. Summary Opinion 2004-19; 2004 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 21;
February 25, 2004, Filed

*21 PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b), THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.

Rene D. Valdes, pro se.
Lorianne D. Masano, for respondent.
Powell, Carleton D.

Powell, Carleton D.

POWELL, Special Trial Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of section 7463 1 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect at the time the petition was filed. The decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion should not be cited as authority.

Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioners' Federal income taxes and accuracy-related penalties as follows:

                  Penalty

   Year    Deficiency     Sec. 6662(a)

   1996    $ 10,950      $ *22 2,190.00

   1997     10,007       2,001.40

   1998     11,643       2,328.60

[3] After a concession by respondent,2 the issues are (1) whether petitioners 3 are liable for taxes on unreported income in the amounts of $ 32,810, $ 33,071, and $ 36,392 for the taxable years 1996, 1997, and 1998, respectively, and (2) whether petitioners are liable for accuracy-related penalties under section 6662(a) for the years in issue. Petitioners resided in Tampa, Florida, at the time the petition was filed.

*23              Background

[4] During the examination of petitioners' 1996, 1997, and 1998 Federal income tax returns, petitioner provided to respondent unorganized boxes of receipts for his business and personal expenses. Respondent calculated petitioner's business expenses using petitioners' 1996, 1997, and 1998 returns. Respondent calculated petitioner's personal expenses for his 1996 and 1997 expenditures using petitioner's receipts. Petitioner did not provide receipts for his 1998 personal expenses, and respondent calculated the 1998 expenditures by averaging the 1996 and 1997 expenditures. Using the cash expenditures method, respondent reconstructed petitioner's business income as follows:

   Year  Reported Income   Reported Expenses  Unreported Income

   ____  _______________   _________________  _________________

   1996    $ 83,353      $ 116,163       $ 32,810

   1997     37,804        70,875        33,071

   1998     39,064        75,456        36,392

Petitioner contends that the unreported income represents nontaxable*24 loans or gifts he received from his mother and his aunt.

This case, upon petitioner's requests, was continued twice. The second continuance was granted on petitioner's representations that he could obtain from Merrill Lynch and Dean Witter "cashier's checks that were handed to me from my mother to pay * * * [my] bills." He alleged that he had the account numbers of his mother's accounts at both firms, and that he could track the funds from those accounts into his hands. According to petitioner, the withdrawals were "in cashier's checks at the time of withdrawal made out to * * * [petitioner's mortgage company]".

At trial 16 months later, petitioner testified that he "didn't have her [his mother's] account numbers * * * until after she's [sic] passed away". His mother died approximately 5 months prior to the trial, and well after his earlier representations that he had her account numbers. He further testified that his mother would sell her stocks and bonds and that "she would always go to the bank and draw it out in cash." There was no mention of the alleged amounts paid to petitioner's mortgage company by cashier's checks drawn on his mother's accounts.

    *25          Discussion

Unreported Income

A taxpayer is required to maintain records sufficient to establish the amount of his or her income and deductions. Sec. 6001; sec. 1.6001-1(a), (e), Income Tax Regs. If the taxpayer does not, the Commissioner is authorized by section 446 to reconstruct the taxpayer's income. Petzoldt v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 661, 693 (1989). The source and application of funds method (also referred to as the cash expenditures method) is an accepted method to reconstruct income. United States v. Johnson, 319 U.S. 503,

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Johnson
319 U.S. 503 (Supreme Court, 1943)
Holland v. United States
348 U.S. 121 (Supreme Court, 1955)
Burgo v. Commissioner
69 T.C. 729 (U.S. Tax Court, 1978)
Petzoldt v. Commissioner
92 T.C. No. 37 (U.S. Tax Court, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2004 T.C. Summary Opinion 19, 2004 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valdes-v-commissioner-tax-2004.