General K. Hilliard and Ida M. Hilliard - Page 14

          petitioners' boat was not being properly serviced and that Mr.              
          Quartiano would be willing to take over charter operations.                 
          During September 1987, petitioners ceased making payments to the            
          bank on the promissory note.  Prior to finalizing any arrangement           
          with Mr. Quartiano, during November 1987, the financing bank                
          brought a Complaint in Admiralty against petitioners and their              
          North Carolina corporation in Federal court to foreclose on a               
          "United States First Preferred Ship Mortgage and Marine Security            
          Agreement", and the fishing boat was seized by U.S. marshals                
          pursuant to a court order.  The fishing boat was sold under a               
          court order on June 24, 1988, for $50,000.  Petitioners claimed             
          depreciation and expenses connected with the fishing boat through           
          1987.  For 1988, the $939 claimed represented legal fees in                 
          connection with the lawsuit and foreclosure of the fishing boat.            
               Other than one short ride, there was no personal use of the            
          fishing boat by the petitioners.  Petitioners believed that the             
          revenues from chartering the fishing boat would be sufficient to            
          cover the mortgage payments on the boat.  Petitioners received              
          monthly charter summaries revealing that the boat had been                  
          chartered very little.                                                      
               (1) Manner in which the taxpayer carries on the activity.              
          The fishing boat activity was operated through petitioners' S               
          corporation, and petitioners relied on their accountant and                 
          independent charter contractors.  Although several entities were            
          interposed between the fishing boat and petitioners, ultimately             
          as owners, it was, in effect, their charter business.  In this              




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