- 34 - land on which this work was done is contiguous to the land on which petitioners maintain their personal residence. We believe that some of this work contributed directly or indirectly to the enjoyment of petitioners' residence. Furthermore, while petitioner hired Mr. Robinson, an experienced farmer, to cultivate row crops on a portion of his land, petitioner did not cultivate row crops on the property during all of the years in issue. (4) Expectation That Assets Used in the Activity May Appreciate in Value Section 1.183-2(b)(4), Income Tax Regs., provides as follows: The term "profit" encompasses appreciation in the value of assets, such as land, used in the activity. Thus, the taxpayer may intend to derive a profit from the operation of the activity, and may also intend that, even if no profit from current operations is derived, an overall profit will result when appreciation in the value of land used in the activity is realized since income from the activity together with the appreciation of the land will exceed the expenses of operation. * * * According to the depreciation schedules attached to petitioners' returns, it appears that petitioners paid $95,000 for their land and more than $68,000 for the improvements and equipment used in connection with their farm activity. Petitioners make a general argument thatPage: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011