Harry E. Thomason and Estate of Hattie D. Thomason, Deceased, Mary T. Crist, Personal Representative - Page 19
Legal Research Home >
US Tax Court > 1997 > Harry E. Thomason and Estate of Hattie D. Thomason, Deceased, Mary T. Crist, Personal Representative - Page 19
- 19 -
relating to the Florida condominium. Therefore, petitioners are
not allowed a deduction for these expenses.
As noted above, the Court holds that petitioners are
entitled to deduct expenses attributable to the Florida condo
activity, under section 212, in the total amount of $3,592.66 for
1991. Further, the Court holds that petitioners are entitled to
a deduction for depreciation, under section 167, in connection
with the Florida condo activity for 1991.12
With respect to the activity petitioner engaged in, which he
referred to at trial as "lawyering", respondent contends that
petitioner's law practice in 1991 was limited to legal actions
taken with respect to his rental real estate activity, such as
the filing of lawsuits against tenants to recover unpaid rent or
to evict, and appearances in court on behalf of his children.
Respondent asserts further that petitioner had no paying clients
in 1991 and derived no income from a law practice that year.
Petitioner's testimony on this subject was
characteristically vague and indicated that he was somewhat
The appropriate amount of such depreciation deduction is
provided by statute, to be determined by the parties in a Rule
155 computation. Petitioners' basis has been established at
$1,950, and no evidence was adduced of any other capital
expenditures that would increase the basis for depreciation
purposes. The Court has made a finding that the Florida condo
constitutes residential rental property. Therefore, the
applicable depreciation method, recovery period, and convention
shall be determined in accordance with the finding under sec.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011