Hardy v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
Decision Date | 05 November 1998 |
Docket Number | No. 97-71097,97-71097 |
Citation | 181 F.3d 1002 |
Parties | (9th Cir. 1999) CATHY MILLER HARDY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
COUNSEL: William P. Koontz, Cottage Grove, Oregon, for the petitioner-appellant.
Robert L. Baker, Tax Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for the respondent-appellee.
Appeal from a Decision of the United States Tax Court Carolyn P. Chiechi, Presiding. Tax Ct. No. 17013-95.
Before: Mary M. Schroeder and Sidney R. Thomas, Circuit Judges, and Barry T. Moskowitz, 1 District Judge.
Cathy Hardy appeals a decision of the United States Tax Court, which affirmed the Internal Revenue Service's ("IRS") assessment of tax deficiency against her. On appeal, Hardy challenges the Tax Court's allocation and application of the burden of proof as well as the Tax Court's application of the so-called innocent spouse provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. We affirm.
In 1981, Cathy Miller married Ray Hardy, and they have resided in Nevada, a community property state, for the duration of their marriage. Cathy and Ray Hardy both had been previously married to other people and both had children from their previous marriages. In 1995, the IRS sent Hardy a notice of income tax deficiency for 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, and 1986 as set forth in the following table:
The IRS based the notice of tax deficiency on Hardy's earnings, as well as one-half of Mr. Hardy's earnings, which it considered Hardy's community property.
In August 1995, Hardy brought suit against the Commissioner of the IRS in the United States Tax Court challenging the assessment. Before trial, the Commissioner stipulated that Hardy did not owe any taxes for 1981, 1982, or 1986 and that she did not owe any taxes based on her own earnings. Hardy stipulated that she had married Mr. Hardy in 1981 and that they had lived in Nevada together for the majority of their marriage. The parties stipulated that the IRS received income statements for Mr. Hardy for the years 1983, 1984, 1985, and 1986, although Hardy did not stipulate that the amounts reported were correct. The parties also agreed that the IRS had no record of Hardy filing a tax return for the years at issue. The amounts that were at issue at trial, based on Hardy's community property share of Mr. Hardy's income, are represented in the following table:
At trial, the Hardys testified that they had an oral contract to keep their respective property separate. The Tax Court found the testimony to be uncredible and, after making findings of fact and conclusions of law, approved the following tax deficiency assessments against Hardy:
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 26 U.S.C. S 7482, and review the Tax Court's findings of fact for clear error and conclusions of law de novo. See Estate of Rapp v. Commissioner, 140 F.3d 1211, 1215 (9th Cir. 1998) (as amended).
Under the facts of this case, the Tax Court correctly allocated the burden of proof regarding Hardy's deficiency to the Commissioner for tax year 1983 and to Hardy for tax years 1984 and 1985. The Commissioner does not challenge the Tax Court's determination that the IRS had the burden of proof for 1983. At issue in this appeal is the burden of proof for tax years 1984 and 1985.
Generally, a presumption of correctness attaches to notices of deficiency in the Tax Court. See Palmer v. United States Internal Revenue Serv., 116 F.3d 1309, 1312 (9th Cir. 1997); Rapp v. Commissioner, 774 F.2d 932, 935 (9th Cir. 1985); Delaney v. Commissioner, 743 F.2d 670, 671 (9th Cir. 1984). For the presumption to apply, however, the Commissioner must base the deficiency on some substantive evidence that the taxpayer received unreported income. See id.; see also United States v. Janis, 428 U.S. 433, 442 (1976) ( ). If the Commissioner introduces some evidence that the taxpayer received unreported income, the burden shifts to the taxpayer to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the deficiency was arbitrary or erroneous. See Rapp, 774 F.2d at 935. If the petitioner succeeds in showing that the deficiency was arbitrary or erroneous, the burden shifts back to the Commissioner to show that the assessment was correct. See Palmer, 116 F.3d at 1312; Keogh v. Commissioner, 713 F.2d 496, 501 (9th Cir. 1983).
Thus, the Commissioner only needed to present some substantive evidence that Hardy received income in 1984 and 1985 in order to shift the burden to Hardy. To that end, the Commissioner introduced worksheets calculating the amount of tax owed by Hardy based on income statements that the IRS had received from Mr. Hardy's employer and his bank. Further, Hardy stipulated before trial that the IRS had received income statements regarding Mr. Hardy's income from his employer during the years in question, therefore relieving the Commissioner of the necessity to introduce the income statements at trial. Finally, Hardy stipulated that she had been married to Mr. Hardy during the years in question and that they had lived in Nevada. Based on these stipulations, the fact that Nevada is a community property state, and the fact that spouses in community property states generally are responsible for one-half of their spouses' earnings, the notice of tax deficiency for the years 1984 and 1985 was presumptively correct.2 Thus, Hardy's argument that the Commissioner failed to sufficiently link her to the unreported income fails.
Hardy argues that the presumption of correctness should not apply because this case involves unreported income, relying on Weimerskirch v. Commissioner, 596 F.2d 358 (9th Cir. 1979), Portillo v. Commissioner, 932 F.2d 1128 (5th Cir. 1991), and Anastasato v. Commissioner, 794 F.2d 884 (3d Cir. 1986). First, we note that Weimerskirch involved unreported "illegal" income. See 596 F.2d at 361-62. But even if we were to extend Weimerskirch to all unreported income cases as the Third and Fifth Circuits have done, the exception only applies when the Commissioner has failed to provide any evidentiary foundation for the deficiency notice. See id. at 362 ("A deficiency determination which is not supported by the proper foundation of substantive evidence is clearly arbitrary and erroneous."). Here, because Mr. Hardy's employer reported his income to the IRS, the Commissioner satisfied the foundational requirements.
Hardy also contends that because the Commissioner stipulated before trial that its assessments were incorrect for 1981, 1982, and 1986, the Commissioner should lose the presumption as to its assessments for 1983, 1984, and 1985. A concession that assessments were incorrect for some years does not bind the Commissioner concerning disputed assessments in other years. See United States Holding Co. v. Commissioner, 44 T.C. 323, 328 (1965); Mensik v. Commissioner, 37 T.C. 703, 725 (1962) ( ); Gobins v. Commissioner, 18 T.C. 1159, 1168-69 (1952) (same), aff'd, 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir. 1954); see also Keogh v. Commissioner, 713 F.2d 496, 502 (9th Cir. 1983) ( ). If we were to hold otherwise, the Commissioner would have a disincentive to stipulate to certain issues before trial, a result that we do not endorse.3
At trial, Hardy's primary argument was that the deficiency was erroneous because it included taxes based on income purportedly earned by Mr. Hardy, income she alleges that she did not receive. She argued that she and Mr. Hardy agreed upon marriage to manage their finances separately.
This argument is unavailing because Nevada is a com- munity property state. See Nev. Rev. Stat.S 123.220 (1997). In United States v. Mitchell, the Supreme Court stated that a spouse in a community property state is liable for tax on onehalf of all income received by the other spouse during the marriage. See 403 U.S. 190, 196 (1971). The Court reasoned that because tax liability is a matter of ownership and ownership is determined by state law, spouses in community property states have a vested interest in one-half of all income earned during the marriage. See id. at 195; see also Edwards v. Commissioner, 680 F.2d 1268, 1271 (9th Cir. 1982) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Allison
...to the taxpayer to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the deficiency was arbitrary or erroneous.") (quoting Hardy v. Comm'r , 181 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir. 1999) ). "A showing by the taxpayer that [the government's] determination is arbitrary, excessive or without foundation shift......
-
United States v. Ford
...745 F.2d 541, 547 (9th Cir. 1984) and Delaney v. Commissioner, 743 F.2d 670, 671 (9th Cir.1984)); see also Hardy v. C.I.R., 181 F.3d 1002, 1004-05 (9th Cir. 1999). Finally, if a taxpayer is successful in overcoming the presumption that the initial determination of tax liability is correct, ......
-
Medrano v. D'Arrigo Bros. Co. of Cal.
...tax code, ownership of property and resulting liability for income tax is determined by reference to state law); Hardy v. C.I.R., 181 F.3d 1002, 1006 (9th Cir.1999); Washington Dep't. Of Social & Health Servs. v. Bowen, 815 F.2d 549, 554-555 (9th Cir.1987) (state law defines "income" for pu......
-
Haeder v. Commissioner, Docket No. 12109-98.
...[Dec. 52,857(M)], T.C. Memo. 1998-316; Hardy v. Commissioner [Dec. 51,902(M)], T.C. Memo. 1997-97, affd. [99-2 USTC ¶ 50,643] 181 F.3d 1002 (9th Cir. 1999). 16. Although Mr. Fuller testified at trial that he incorrectly reported commissions refunded in 1990 in connection with petitioner's i......
-
Tax Court In Brief | Podlucky v. Commissioner | $34M Jewelry In A Secret Room, Constructive Receipt, Innocent Spouse, And Putative Monks
...burden, the burden shifts to the taxpayer to show that the IRS's determinations are arbitrary or erroneous. See Hardy v. Commissioner, 181 F.3d 1002, 1004-05 (9th 1999), aff'gC. Memo. 1997-97; Anastasato v. Commissioner, 794 F.2d 884, 887-88 (3d Cir. 1986), vacating and remanding T.C. Memo.......
-
Tax Court In Brief | Dern v. Comm'r | Direct Causation A Must To Exclude From Income Damages For Injury Or Sickness, Section 104(a)(2)
...foundation is established, the taxpayer has the burden of proving the determination is arbitrary or erroneous. See Hardy v. Commissioner, 181 F.3d 1002, 1004-05 (9th Cir. aff'g T.C. Memo. 1997-97. Gross income includes all income from any source and statutory exclusions from gross income ar......
-
Treatment of community income for spouses living apart: Sec. 66 may relieve a separated spouse of the duty to report a portion of the other spouse's community property income. Part I of this two-part article discusses the requirements for relief under sec. 66(a) and denial of community property benefits under sec. 66(b).
...879(a)(1) and 911(d)(2). (24) See Secs. 879(a)(2) and 1402(a)(5)(A). (25) See Secs. 879(a)(2) and 1402(a)(5)(B). (26) See Miller Hardy, 181 F3d 1002 (9th Cir. (27) A taxpayer confronted with a Sec. 66(b) action needs to show only that he or she complied with one of the two requirements; see......
-
Treatment of community income for spouses living apart.
...(46) See Preamble, TD 9074 (7/10/03). (47) Robert L. Beck, TC Memo 2001-198, acq. IRB 2002-49. (48) Cathy Hardy, TC Memo 1997-97, aff'd, 181 F3d 1002 (9th Cir. (49) See Regs. Sec. 1.664(j )(i). (50) Preamble, TD 9074, note 46 supra; and Regs. Sec. 1.66-4(c). (51) See Regs. Sec. 1.66-4(j)(ii......