2845.Determining Income: Speciﬁc Items Method
In this case, the People are [also] using the speciﬁc items method to try
to prove that the defendant had unreported taxable income. I will now
explain the speciﬁc items method.
In order to prove that the defendant received unreported taxable
income under the speciﬁc items method, the People must prove that:
1. The defendant received income during <insert year
2. The income the defendant received was taxable;
3. The income the defendant received was substantially greater
than the income (he/she) reported on (his/her) tax return for
<insert year alleged>.
If you have a reasonable doubt about whether the People have proved
1, 2, or 3, you must ﬁnd that the People have not proved under the
speciﬁc items method that the defendant had unreported taxable
[If, on the other hand, you conclude that the defendant did have
unreported taxable income, you must still decide whether the People
have proved all elements of the crimes[s] charged [in Count[s] ].]
New January 2006
It is unclear if the court has a sua sponte duty to instruct on the speciﬁc items
method of proof. If the prosecution is relying on this method and another method
of proof, the court should instruct on both methods. (See United States v.
Meriwether (5th Cir. 1971) 440 F.2d 753, 756–757 [reversed because instructions
on speciﬁc items and net worth method not sufficiently clear].)
The court must also give the appropriate instruction on the elements of the offense
Give the bracketed sentence that begins with “If, on the other hand, you conclude”
in every case, unless the court is giving CALCRIM No. 2846, Proof of Unreported
Taxable Income: Must Still Prove Elements of Offense.
• Speciﬁc Items Method Explained. United States v. Hart (6th Cir. 1995) 70