Peter U. and Mary M. Boehme - Page 13




                                       - 13 -                                         
          principal residence, which does not qualify as “property held for           
          investment”.  See sec. 163(d)(5)(A).  (As noted previously, there           
          is no evidence in the record as to petitioners’ use of the                  
          $86,000 balance of the loans.)  Thus, the $64,000 interest                  
          payment is not allocable to an “investment expenditure”, which is           
          defined, in pertinent part, as “an expenditure * * * properly               
          chargeable to capital account with respect to property held for             
          investment”.  See sec. 1.163-8T(a)(4)(C), (b)(3), Temporary                 
          Income Tax Regs., 52 Fed. Reg. 24999 (July 2, 1987).  As a                  
          result, no portion of the $64,000 interest payment qualifies as             
          “investment interest” within the meaning of section 163(h)(2)(B).           
               E.  Conclusion                                                         
               The $64,000 interest payment constituted the payment of                
          nondeductible “personal interest” under section 163(h).                     
               To reflect the foregoing,                                              

                                                  Decision will be entered            
                                             under Rule 155.                          


















Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  

Last modified: May 25, 2011