Module 1.1 - Relevancy

5 Questions | Total Attempts: 31

SettingsSettingsSettings
Please wait...
Module Quizzes & Trivia

This module will assess your knowledege of Federal Rules of Evidence 401, 402, 403, 404, and 406�as interpreted by the United States Tax Court.


Questions and Answers
  • 1. 
    TP formed and operated two limited partnerships, A and B, to conduct TP's publishing business.  A and B are unsuccessful in making a profit.  TP then forms another limited partnership, C, to conduct TP's publishing business.  IRS seeks to introduce evidence supporting A's and B's lack of success for purposes of showing that TP lacked a profit objective when forming and operating C. 
    • A. 

      The evidence is not relevant because it tends to show something other than TP's lack of profit objective.

    • B. 

      The evidence is relevant because it tends to show that TP was aware of the prior unsuccessful attempts when forming C.

    • C. 

      The evidnce is not relevant because the business success of A and B does not tend to show the possible business success of C.

    • D. 

      The evidence is relevant because it tends to show that A and B were formed and operated without a profit objective.

  • 2. 
    TP seeks to introduce evidence that would support his position on multiple issues in the case.  IRS objects on the grounds that the evidence is not relevant to a specific issue.  The Tax Court rules in IRS favor on the specific issue. May the evidence be used to support TP on his position for other issues in the case?
    • A. 

      No, if the evidence is not relevant to one specific issue in the case.

    • B. 

      Yes, if the evidence is relevant to other issues in the case.

    • C. 

      Yes, because the Tax Court treats relevancy objections as going more to the weight given to evidence rather than to its admissibility.

    • D. 

      Both B and C are correct.

  • 3. 
    IRS intends to show that TP had an interest in a partnership as of 2008. TP offers into evidence various documents supporting the partnership's transactions occurring in  2009 through 2011.  IRS objects on relevancy grounds.  Are these documents relevant?
    • A. 

      Yes, if the documents tend to show that TP withdrew from or had her interest in the partnership terminated during 2008.

    • B. 

      No, if TP provided no explanation as to the relevance of these documents to 2008.

    • C. 

      Yes, because the Tax Court treats relevancy objections as going to the weight of the evidence, not to its admissibility

    • D. 

      Both A and B are correct.

    • E. 

      Both A and C are correct.

  • 4. 
    In a divorce decree issued by a state court judge, the judge stated in her order that the "trial Court specifically retained jurisdiction over the litigation with respect to alimony."  At issue before the tax court is whether TP made payments that are alimony or payments that are part of a property settlement.  TP seeks to introduce into evidence the state judge's order declaring his payments "alimony."  IRS objects on relavancy grounds.  How does the Tax Court rule? ""   "TPT ."J "" 
    • A. 

      Objection sustained, where the record (i.e., the facts of the case) of the state court proceeding is not entered into with the state court order.

    • B. 

      Objection sustained, where the state court judge's order is unclear as to why she determined the payments were alimony.

    • C. 

      Objection overruled, where the the Tax Court is allowed to take judicial notice of the state court judge's order.

    • D. 

      Both A and B are correct.

  • 5. 
    At issue is the sales price TP charged in an individual sales transaction occurring in 2001.  IRS seeks to introduce the total revenue for sales of an unknown quantity of the same item for the years 2001 through 2010.  TP objects on relevancy grounds.  How does the Tax Court rule?  
    • A. 

      Objection sustained, where the evidence prejudices TP.

    • B. 

      Objection sustained, where the evidence of the total revenue in year 2001, if any year at all, is sufficient to determine the sales price of the transaction at issue.

    • C. 

      Objection overruled, where the Tax Court determines that the total revenue for the years 2001 through 2010 is relevant.

    • D. 

      All of the above are correct.

Back to Top Back to top