- 7 - accurate records. Id. The fact that an individual adopts a different method of operating or abandons unprofitable methods with respect to operating his or her activity may suggest a desire to earn a profit. Id. Petitioners have failed to persuade us that they conducted their breeding activity in a businesslike manner. They rely merely on their subjective expressions of intent, as well as the limited testimony of family members. Petitioners did not produce any of their activity’s records at trial. They did not establish that they used "cost accounting techniques that, 'at a minimum, provide the entrepreneur with the information he [or she] requires to make informed business decisions." Burger v. Commissioner, 809 F.2d 355, 359 (7th Cir. 1987) (quoting Burger v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1985-523), affg. T.C. Memo. 1985-523. They did not demonstrate that they monitored expenses or assessed their activity's profitability. They did not establish that they maintained a budget for their activity, or that they advertized any of their cattle for sale. Although Mr. Vallette testified without contradiction that he tried before the subject years to remedy his problem with “bad cattle” by switching his breed of cattle to a breed that his “common knowledge” told him was the better breed, we do not believe that this self-supporting statement standing alone is enough to establish a profit intent. The fact that petitioners’ activity experienced losses year after year, and that they took no action to explain the losses or toPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011