Bruno and Francesca Tabbi - Page 27

                                       - 27 -                                         
          issue was ordinary and not capital because he held the real                 
          estate primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of            
          business.  Sec. 1221(1); Suburban Realty Co. v. United States,              
          615 F.2d 171, 174 (5th Cir. 1980); Biedenharn Realty Co. v.                 
          United States, 526 F.2d 409, 415 (5th Cir. 1976).                           
               Section 1221(1) excludes from capital asset classification--           
               stock in trade of the taxpayer or other property of a                  
               kind which would properly be included in the inventory                 
               of the taxpayer if on hand at the close of the taxable                 
               year, or property held by the taxpayer primarily for                   
               sale to customers in the ordinary course of his trade                  
               or business * * *                                                      
               The function of section 1221(1) is "to differentiate between           
          'profits and losses arising from the everyday operation of a                
          business' * * * and 'the realization of appreciation in value               
          accrued over a substantial period of time'".  Malat v. Riddell,             
          383 U.S. 569, 572 (1966).  "Primarily" means "principally" or "of           
          first importance".  Malat v. Riddell, supra.                                
               Whether property is held by a taxpayer "primarily for sale             
          to customers in the ordinary course of * * * business" is a                 
          question of fact.  S & H, Inc. v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 234, 242            
          (1982).  Courts consider numerous factors in deciding this issue,           
          and no one factor is controlling.  Biedenharn Realty Co. v.                 
          United States, supra at 415.  Petitioner bears the burden of                
          proving that his property was not so held.  Rule 142(a); Welch v.           
          Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).                                        
               The following factors indicate that petitioner husband held            
          the houses primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course           



Page:  Previous  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011