Gordon v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, Docket No. 2830-71.

Decision Date30 January 1975
Docket NumberDocket No. 2830-71.
Citation63 T.C. 501
PartiesHARRY AND GERALDINE GORDON, PETITIONERS v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT
CourtU.S. Tax Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Bruce I. Hochman and Harvey D. Tack, for the petitioners.

Randall G. Dick, for the respondent.

Subsequent to the filing of the opinion in the case of Harry Gordon, 63 T.C. 51, (1974), both parties jointly and individually petitioned this Court for a Revision of Opinion. Upon consideration of these motions, certain changes are hereby made. Harry Gordon, 63 T.C. 51 (1974), modified.

SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION

HALL, Judge:

An opinion (63 T.C. 51) was filed in this case on October 31, 1974. On November 18, 1974, the parties filed a Joint Motion for Revision of Opinion. On November 19, 1974, respondent filed a Motion for Reconsideration and Revision of Opinion, together with a memorandum brief, to which petitioner filed a reply on December 26, 1974. On December 2, 1974, petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration to which respondent replied on January 2, 1975. After considering the parties' various motions and briefs, we make the following changes in our original opinion:

(1) Delete lines 25 through 33 on page 69 and substitute therefor the following:

Ninth Circuit), upholding such fifth amendment claims. Hill v. Philpott, 445 F.2d 144 (C.A. 7, 1971); Vonder Ahe v. Howland (C.A. 9, 1973, 31 AFTR 2d 73-1075, 73-1 USTC par. 9333), reversing (N.D. Cal. 1971, 27 AFTR 2d 71-1176, 71-1 USTC par. 9315). However, the Ninth Circuit has since withdrawn its original opinion and left this point undecided. 74-2 USTC par. 9825 (C.A. 9, 1974). And the Sixth Circuit has held that no fifth amendment rights are violated by such procedure. United States v. Blank, 459 F.2d 383 (C.A. 6, 1972), certiorari denied 409 U.S. 887 (1972). But despite the presently somewhat confused state of the law on this question, one factor present in our case renders it unnecessary to consider further this fifth amendment contention. The record herein were not the private

(2) Delete the last 4 lines on page 76 through the top 8 lines of page 78, and substitute therefor the following:

The Derby's gross-profit percentage for the horse book for 1967 according to its books and records (which reflect only bets on which the Federal excise tax was paid and do not reflect coded bets on which no tax was paid) was 24.75 percent. We conclude that the gross profit attributable to the horse book operation for 1967 is $381,928.93, computed as follows:

+------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦Gross wagers, January through September¦¦             ¦
                +---------------------------------------++-------------¦
                ¦(respondents's corrected projection)   ¦¦$1,682,083.60¦
                +---------------------------------------++-------------¦
                ¦Gross wagers, October through December ¦¦             ¦
                +---------------------------------------++-------------¦
                ¦(Derby's books)                        ¦¦$357,740.00  ¦
                +---------------------------------------++-------------¦
                ¦Total                                  ¦¦$2,039,823.60¦
                +---------------------------------------++-------------¦
                ¦Multiplied by gross-profit percentage  ¦¦24.75%       ¦
                +------------------------------------------------------+
                
                                               $504,856.34
                Less: Excise tax on unreported wagers—January through September
                (10% of $756,937.60)            $75,693.76
                Less: Service refunds           47,233.65      $122,927.41
                Gross profit—horses                            $381,928.93
                

The Derby's gross-profit percentage for the sports book for 1967 according to its books and records was 7.79 percent. We conclude that the gross profit attributable to the sports book for 1967 is $11,519.10, computed as follows:

+-----------------------------------------------------+
                ¦Gross wagers, January through September¦             ¦
                +---------------------------------------+-------------¦
                ¦respondent's corrected projection)     ¦$1,302,003.14¦
                +---------------------------------------+-------------¦
                ¦Gross wagers, October through December ¦             ¦
                +---------------------------------------+-------------¦
                ¦(Derby's books)                        ¦$199,683.00  ¦
                +---------------------------------------+-------------¦
                ¦Total                                  ¦$1,501,686.14¦
                +---------------------------------------+-------------¦
                ¦Multiplied by gross-profit percentage  ¦7.79%        ¦
                +-----------------------------------------------------+
                
                                                                    $116,981.35
                Less: Excise tax on unreported wagers—January through September     $105,462.25
                (10% of $1,054,622.54)
                Gross profit—sports                                                 $11,519.10
                

Using the above calculations, the total gross profit of the Derby for 1967 was $393,448.03, of which only $305,195 was reported on its partnership return, leaving $88,253.03 unreported. Petitioner's 80-percent interest in the unreported profit of the Derby is $70,602.42.

Petitioner noted that respondent's method of projecting income had failed to allow a deduction or offset to income for the accrual of excise tax for the Derby, an accrual basis taxpayer. We agree with petitioner that the Derby is entitled to accrue the wagering tax and, as noted above, have allowed such accrual. ‘Under an accrual method of accounting, an expense is deductible...

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • Simkins v. Commissioner
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • August 28, 1978
    ...correct result considering the absence of required records." Gordon v. Commissioner Dec. 32,823, 63 T.C. 51, 78, (1974), modified Dec. 33,025 63 T.C. 501 (1975), revd. in part on another issue 77-2 USTC ¶ 9742 572 F. 2d 193 (9th Cir. 1977), cert. denied ___ U.S. ___ (1978). The mere fact th......
  • Conforte v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • September 8, 1980
    ...gambling income over the entire period of gambling activity shown. See, e.g., Gordon v. Commissioner, 63 T.C. 51, 61 (1974), modified 63 T.C. 501 (1975), affd. per curiam 572 F.2d 193 (9th Cir. 1977) (1 day); Fiorella v. Commissioner, 361 F.2d 326 (5th Cir. 1966), affg. per curiam a Memoran......
  • Davies v. Commissioner
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • August 17, 1981
    ...77-2 USTC ¶ 9747, 572 F. 2d 193, 195 (CA9 1977), affg. in part and revg. in part Dec. 33,025 63 T.C. 51 (1974), supplemental opinion 63 T.C. 501 (1975); Mendelson v. Commissioner 62-2 USTC ¶ 9627, 305 F. 2d 519 (CA7 1962), affg. a Memorandum Opinion of this Court;10 Conforte v. Commissioner......
  • Gerardo v. C.I.R.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • March 18, 1977
    ...e., without rational foundation in fact and based upon unsupported assumptions). . . . " Harry Gordon, 63 T.C. 51, 73 (1974), modified, 63 T.C. 501 (1975) appeal pending; see Baird v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, supra at 492. On appeal, our scope of review "is limited by the general p......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT