Clarence A. Hunt, Jr. - Page 6

                                                 - 6 -                                                    

            recreation involved in the activity.  These factors are not                                   
            merely a counting device where the number of factors for or                                   
            against the taxpayer is determinative, but rather all facts and                               
            circumstances must be taken into account, and more weight may be                              
            given to some factors than to others.  Cf. Dunn v. Commissioner,                              
            70 T.C. 715, 720 (1978), affd. 615 F.2d 578 (2d Cir. 1980).  Not                              
            all factors are applicable in every case, and no one factor is                                
            controlling.  Abramson v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 360, 371 (1986);                              
            Allen v. Commissioner, 72 T.C. 28, 34 (1979); sec. 1.183-2(b),                                
            Income Tax Regs.                                                                              
                  In considering the objective factors relevant to this case,                             
            the Court is satisfied, based on the record, that petitioner has                              
            not sustained his burden of establishing that he conducted his                                
            horse racing activity with an actual and honest objective of                                  
            making a profit in 1990.  Petitioner did not present any                                      
            documentary or other evidence to show that his activity was                                   
            carried on in a businesslike manner or that he maintained                                     
            complete and accurate books and records of the activity.  Nor did                             
            petitioner present any evidence of the amount of time he expended                             
            on the activity.  On the other hand, it is clear from the record                              
            that petitioner's employment with Allied was full time.  Further,                             
            the Court cannot ignore the fact that petitioner realized only                                
            nominal gross income and never realized a profit from the                                     
            activity over the period from 1985 to 1990 and thereafter.                                    

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011