- 12 - Stubblefield v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1988-480; Ruben v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1986-260, affd. without published opinion 852 F.2d 1290 (9th Cir. 1988). Petitioners purchased and held the property as a personal residence for 3 years before converting it into a ranch. Silk Oak still serves as petitioners' residence, and the valuation in question, stipulated by the parties, used a market comparison approach to real estate valuation. The properties used by the appraiser in comparison to petitioners' property were residential properties, rather than ranches. The appreciation of the real estate in question, therefore, is based upon its use as a residence, rather than as a horse ranch. Ruben v. Commissioner, supra. Consequently, we will not consider the real estate as an appreciated "asset" held by petitioners to offset Silk Oak's losses. Id. Petitioners also argue that they had hoped that appreciation in the value of their horses would yield a profit in the future. Petitioners' losses from the operation of Silk Oak total $145,510. At the time of trial, petitioners owned eight horses and had never generated more than $2,500 in profit from the sale of any one horse. Even if their entire stock of horses were liquidated at fair market value, the maximum profit generated would be $42,000. It is, therefore, unlikely that petitioners will generate any profits from the sale of their horses in the near future that would recoup more than a fraction of the past losses. This factor favors respondent.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011