- 20 - had sufficiently increased in weight, they would be sold at auction. Petitioners also asserted that their livestock would increase in size and value through breeding. The record does not support petitioners' assertions. Section 1.183-1(d)(1), Income Tax Regs., provides that Where land is purchased or held primarily with the intent to profit from increase in its value, and the taxpayer also engages in farming on such land, the farming and the holding of the land will ordinarily be considered a single activity only if the farming activity reduces the net cost of carrying the land for its appreciation in value. Thus, the farming and holding of the land will be considered a single activity only if the income derived from farming exceeds the deductions attributable to the farming activity which are not directly attributable to the holding of the land (that is, deductions other than those directly attributable to the holding of the land such as interest on a mortgage secured by the land, annual property taxes attributable to the land and improvements, and depreciation of improvements to the land). In that regard, petitioners' gross income derived from their farming activity for the taxable years 1991, 1992, and 1993, was $715, $1,919, and zero, respectively.6 Petitioners' car and truck expenses for the taxable years, 1991, 1992, and 1993, were $2,601, $7,124, and $3,724, respectively. The nominal income from the farming activity fell far short of the deductions attributable to the farming activity (e.g., the car and truck expenses). Sec. 1.183-1(d)(1), Income Tax Regs. Accordingly, 6 Petitioners entered a loss of $600 for gross income derived from their farming activity for the 1993 taxable year.Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011