- 11 -
the daily market movements and to profit from these short-term
changes rather than to profit from the long-term holding of
investments. See Estate of Yaeger v. Commissioner, 889 F.2d 29,
33 (2d Cir. 1989), revg. on another issue, affg. in part and
remanding T.C. Memo. 1988-264; Moller v. United States, supra at
813; Purvis v. Commissioner, 530 F.2d 1332, 1334 (9th Cir. 1976),
affg. T.C. Memo. 1974-164; King v. Commissioner, supra at 458-
459; Liang v. Commissioner, 23 T.C. 1040, 1043 (1955); Mayer v.
Commissioner, supra. The taxpayer's trading activity must be
frequent, regular, and continuous to be considered part of a
trade or business. See Commissioner v. Groetzinger, 480 U.S. 23,
35 (1987). Sporadic trading does not constitute a trade or
business. Id. Furthermore, courts look at whether the
taxpayer's securities income is principally derived from frequent
and substantial sale of securities rather than from dividends,
interest, or long-term appreciation. Moller v. United States,
supra at 813; King v. Commissioner, supra at 458-459; Liang v.
Commissioner, supra at 1043.
Petitioner executed approximately 75 securities transactions
during 1992. This level of trading activity falls short of being
frequent, regular, and continuous. See, e.g., Purvis v.
Commissioner, supra at 1334 (taxpayer was merely an investor
where, among other things, his sales of stock were not regular or
continuous). Petitioner has failed to meet his burden of proof
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011