- 15 -
taxpayer borrowed money to buy a controlling interest in the
stock of a bank so that he could become the bank's president.
The corporation paid little or no dividends while the taxpayer
owned it. The taxpayer contended that he held the bank stock as
part of his trade or business of banking (and not as an
investment) because it allowed him to become the bank president.
Id. at 453. We concluded that the taxpayer ran the corporation
to increase its resale value and that the taxpayer held the stock
as an investment.
We recognize that petitioner wanted to work for Seattle
Pump; however, like Miller, the objective facts show that
petitioners held the stock as an investment, not as part of a
trade or business. The stock of Seattle Pump is a capital asset.
Petitioner researched the company before buying the stock as a
prudent investor would. He learned that Seattle Pump had been
profitable. Petitioner believed petitioners paid fair market
value for the stock. Payment of fair market value for stock
suggests that the stock was held for investment purposes; payment
of a price above fair market value would have suggested it was
not held as an investment. Id. at 456. Petitioners have held
the stock for a relatively long period of time. They have
enjoyed the benefits of stock ownership, including control of
Seattle Pump. Petitioners will benefit, as any investor would,
if the value of the stock rises. Petitioner testified that he
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