United States v. Dean Youngquist

MEMORANDUM

Defendant-Appellant Dean M. Youngquist appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in .favor of the United States. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Summary judgment in favor of the United States was properly granted. Although Youngquist alleges that he incurred a loss of $5,677.34 on his ProTrade stock transactions in 1996, he does not dispute that ProTrade accurately reported that he sold $1,451,076 worth of stock that year. Thus, the only question is whether the cost of acquiring the stock exceeded the sales proceeds such that the sales generated no taxable gain.

Youngquist has the burden to prove the cost basis in his ProTrade stock sales. See Moore v. Comm’r, 425 F.2d 713, 715 (9th Cir.1970) (“Under 26 U.S.C. § 1012 , the taxpayer bears the burden of establishing the cost basis of property.”). However, Youngquist failed to produce any records from ProTrade or any contemporaneous records of his own establishing the cost of each stock he purchased through Pro-Trade.

Youngquist’s non-specific testimony and ambiguous bank account records from Washington Federal Savings showing a $73,000 withdrawal on November 5,…