5
Transaction & Losses
Claimed Appendixes A-1 and A-2 Line Nos.
First Contracts -- ($837,500) A-1, Lines 5, 7, 9, 11, 17-24, 26, 28
Second Contracts -- ($816,219) A-2, Lines 1, 3, 5, 7-12, 24-26, 29, 30
Third Contracts -- ( $10,000) A-2, Lines 13-20
The opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit in Stoller v. Commissioner, supra, provides only
an abbreviated explanation of the particular forward contracts
that were the subject of the appeal of our opinion in Stoller v.
Commissioner, supra, and that are at issue herein.
We also, in light of the essentially legal nature of the
issue before us, set forth herein a somewhat abbreviated
explanation of the details of the particular forward contracts
that are at issue, but we emphasize particular aspects of these
forward contracts, the significance of which appears to have been
overlooked by the Court of Appeals in its analysis and opinion in
Stoller v. Commissioner, supra.
We believe that the aspects of these transactions that we
emphasize herein are significant and determinative of the narrow
issue before us (namely, whether the losses in question are
deductible as capital or as ordinary losses). We also note that
respondent has conceded the increased interest under section
6621(c) and makes no contention herein that the forward contracts
at issue were sham transactions or lacked a business purpose or
profit motive. Further, no issue is raised as to petitioners’
cost basis in the forward contracts in question.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011