- 46 -
are not deductible under either section 162 or 212. See sec. 262.
Lear Jet
Petitioners have not satisfied their burden of proving that
the large expenses of operating the Lear jet qualify as ordinary
and necessary business expenses of petitioners' timber farm, of
petitioner’s consulting business, or of petitioner's computer
and real estate rental businesses. The expenses of purchasing,
maintaining, and operating a personal Lear jet to make a few
trips each year to Oregon and to Utah appear extraordinary. On
the facts of this case, such expenses do not constitute ordinary
and necessary expenses of any of petitioners’ business
activities.
Further, because the Tahiti Property does not qualify as a
business or for-profit activity, petitioners' transportation to
Tahiti in the Lear jet does not qualify as anything other than
personal travel. The large transportation expenses (including
significant noncash expenses such as depreciation) associated
with the Lear jet appear to be out of the ordinary and to be
unnecessary particularly in light of the fact that petitioners'
timber farm was not producing any current income (due to
petitioner's decision to defer cutting any of the timber) and to
the fact that the Tahiti Property, as we have held, did not
constitute a for-profit activity. See Commissioner v.
Heininger, 320 U.S. 467, 469 (1943), as to the factual nature of
this issue.
Page: Previous 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011