DocketNumber: Docket No. 13092-96
Citation Numbers: 73 T.C.M. 2912, 1997 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 284, 1997 T.C. Memo. 249
Judges: DINAN
Filed Date: 6/3/1997
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
*284 Decision will be entered for respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
DINAN,
After a concession by petitioners, *287 during 1993.
This case was submitted fully stipulated under Rule 122. The stipulations of fact and attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. Petitioners resided in West Islip, New York, on the date the petition was filed in this case.
Petitioners maintained a brokerage account with Bear, Stearns Securities Corp. (Bear, Stearns) during 1993. Their brokerage account holdings included original issue discount debt instruments and stripped bonds. The record does not reveal the issuance date of the debt instruments or the stripped bonds, or the date on which they were acquired by petitioners.
Bear, Stearns issued*288 a consolidated Form 1099-INT-DIV-MISC-OID-1099B (Form 1099) that reported $ 14,847.50 of original issue discount that had accrued on petitioners' holdings in 1993. Petitioners failed to report the accrued original issue discount on their 1993 joint Federal income tax return. Respondent issued a statutory notice of deficiency that increased petitioners' 1993 interest income by $ 14,845 to reflect the unreported original issue discount.
Petitioners argue that because they use the cash receipts and disbursements method of accounting they should not be required to include the disputed amount of original issue discount in their gross income until they*291 actually receive the original issue discount. We disagree with petitioners.
We find that petitioners have failed to prove that
To reflect the foregoing,
1. Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the taxable year in issue. All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.↩
2. In their petition to the Court, petitioners failed to address respondent's determination that they received and failed to report dividend income in the amount of $ 16. We deem petitioners to have conceded this issue. Rule 34(b) (4). Respondent's adjustment to petitioners' miscellaneous itemized deductions is computational and will be resolved by the Court's holding on the issue in this case.↩
3. The difference between the original issue discount amount reported on the Form 1099 and the amount determined in the statutory notice of deficiency is due to rounding.↩
4. The requirement that debt instrument holders include original issue discount in income ratably over the life of the instrument was first enacted by the Tax Reform Act of 1969, Pub. L. 91-172, sec. 413, 83 Stat. 487, 609, as former section 1232(a) (3). This requirement was carried forward as former section 1232A(a) (1) by the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, Pub. L. 97-248, sec. 231, 96 Stat. 324, 496. The language of