Danny K. Eldridge and Elma J. Eldridge - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         
          the taxpayers or their advisers; (3) the time and effort expended           
          by the taxpayers in carrying on the activity; (4) the expectation           
          that the assets used in the activity may appreciate in value; (5)           
          the success of the taxpayers in carrying on other similar or                
          dissimilar activities; (6) the taxpayer's history of income or              
          losses with respect to the activity; (7) the amount of occasional           
          profits, if any, which are earned; (8) the financial status of              
          the taxpayers; and (9) any elements indicating personal pleasure            
          or recreation.  Although these factors are helpful in                       
          ascertaining a taxpayer's objective in engaging in the activity,            
          no single factor, nor the existence of even a majority of the               
          factors, is controlling; rather, the facts and circumstances of             
          the case remain the primary test.  Keanini v. Commissioner, supra           
          at 47.                                                                      
               As pointed out in our underlying opinion, petitioners did              
          not show a profit for any of the years at issue and sustained               
          losses from their cattle-raising activity over a 14-year period.            
          Also, petitioner husband had substantial income from his job in             
          the natural gas industry.  Under the foregoing legal principles,            
          those and other facts of record were indicative of an activity              
          not engaged in for profit.  Petitioners presented other,                    
          persuasive evidence at trial that indicated that the activity was           
          engaged in for profit.  After analyzing all of the facts and                
          circumstances of the case, we concluded that petitioners did have           
          the requisite profit objective.                                             

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011