- 8 -
of the property. "Where the taxpayer is, however, granted
exclusive use of and unfettered access to the property the
character of the expenditure changes." Harrigan Lumber Co. v.
Commissioner, supra at 1567.
The precise line between exclusive and nonexclusive use may
be difficult to draw. However, where the taxpayer, as here and
in Harrigan, dominates the use of the hunting rights, we have no
difficulty in finding that in substance the taxpayer enjoys the
exclusive rights under the lease. Accordingly, the hunting lease
here in question falls within the definition of a "facility" in
the statute and regulations.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
5(...continued)
For example, if a salesman took a customer hunting for
a day at a commercial shooting preserve, the expenses
of the hunt * * * would be deductible provided that the
current law requirements of substantiation * * * are
met. However, if the hunters stayed overnight at a
hunting lodge on the shooting preserve, the cost
attributable to the lodging would be nondeductible
* * *
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Last modified: May 25, 2011