Derwyn Joseph Booker - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
               The existence of the required profit objective is determined           
          by the objective of the entity which has control over the                   
          activity under scrutiny.  Drobny v. Commissioner, supra at 1341.            
          Thus, the existence of a profit objective of a partnership is               
          determined at the partnership level, Agro Science Co. v.                    
          Commissioner, supra at 576; the existence of a profit objective             
          of a joint venture is determined at the joint venture level,                
          Brannen v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 471, 501-505 (1982), affd. 722             
          F.2d 695 (11th Cir. 1984).                                                  
               Resolution of whether a taxpayer engages in an activity with           
          the requisite intention of making a profit is one of fact to be             
          resolved on the basis of all the facts and circumstances.  Agro             
          Science Co. v. Commissioner, supra at 576; Hulter v.                        
          Commissioner, 91 T.C. 371, 393-394 (1988); Drobny v.                        
          Commissioner, supra at 1341.  In making this determination, more            
          weight must be given to the objective facts than to the                     
          taxpayer's mere after-the-fact statements of intent.  Agro                  
          Science Co. v. Commissioner, supra at 576; Beck v. Commissioner,            
          85 T.C. 557, 570 (1985); sec. 1.183-2(a), Income Tax Regs.                  
               Petitioner made no independent investigation of Century                
          Concepts prior to his participation.  He did not obtain the                 
          services of any professional to review the leasing documents                
          before signing.  Petitioner failed to obtain any independent                
          appraisals of the masters and, in fact, never received a copy of            
          one master and never opened the copy he did have of the other.              




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011