- 39 - defer the recognition of the gain from the sale of the Roslyn residence, rather than choosing to offset that gain by his 1986 net trading loss. About 18 months before the IRS revenue agent orally informed Mr. Gordon in October 1988 that his 1986 net trading loss was properly reported as an ordinary loss in the 1986 return, the Gordons indicated in the Form 2119 included as part of their 1986 return that they planned to replace the Roslyn residence within the "replacement period". Furthermore, only a few weeks after that agent so informed Mr. Gordon, the Gordons consummated the purchase of the Lincoln Plaza residence. On the record before us, we find that Mr. Gordon has failed to show that, under the facts and circumstances presented here, the doctrine of equitable estoppel should be applied against respondent. Accordingly, on that record, we find that respondent is not equitably estopped from claiming that petitioners are not entitled to the claimed 1988 NOL deduction because Mr. Gordon's 1986 net trading loss constitutes a capital, and not an ordinary, loss. Innocent Spouse Ms. Gordon claims that she qualifies for innocent spouse relief under section 6013(e)(1) with respect to the portion of the understatement of tax for 1988 that is attributable to thePage: Previous 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011