- 12 -
Rather, petitioner appears to have sought long-term returns from
his ownership interests, which is the hallmark of the investor.
Deely v. Commissioner, supra. Although petitioner was actively
involved in the management of the apartment building, there is no
evidence he was directly compensated for his services. Moreover,
it does not appear that he planned to sell the apartment building
once it became established; rather, he sold it as a result of his
divorce proceedings.
Similarly, petitioner apparently sought a return from
Cinevision in the form of enhanced value of his investment,
rather than from direct compensation for his services to the
corporation. Petitioner, moreover, reported the income or loss
connected with Cinevision as passive income or loss on his 1987
through 1989 returns. Petitioner’s activities with respect to
Cinevision, which consisted of meetings with its management to
discuss its difficulties, appear no different from those of an
investor seeking to protect his investment. As we discuss below,
we reach the same conclusion with respect to petitioner’s
activities in connection with Color Trick.
The record is also devoid of evidence of other indicia of a
business of promoting corporations, such as the active seeking
out of opportunities to promote corporations, advertising, the
maintenance of a separate office or books of account for such a
business, or the preparation of statements of profit and loss
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011