Don C. and Judy Montgomery - Page 25

                                       - 25 -                                         

             automobile, a 1981 Buick, to make business trips on                      
             behalf of H&B.                                                           
                  Petitioners also appear to argue that petitioner                    
             received the Lincoln in a like-kind exchange under section               
             1031.  We find petitioners' argument without merit.                      
             Petitioner failed to introduce documentary evidence that                 
             he received the Lincoln Mark VII in exchange for a tractor-              
             trailer, and there is no documentary evidence that                       
             petitioner owned a tractor-trailer other than the one he                 
             testified that he contributed to Pet-Don.  Moreover, Pet-                
             Don, and not petitioner, was the record owner of the                     
             Lincoln Mark VII at all relevant times.  Essentially,                    
             petitioners argue that they exchanged a tractor-trailer                  
             which they did not own for an automobile which they did                  
             not own.  This is clearly beyond the scope of section 1031.              
                  Furthermore, section 1031 requires that both the                    
             property transferred and the property received in a like-                
             kind exchange be held primarily for productive use in a                  
             trade or business, or for investment.  Sec. 1031(a)(1).                  
             Petitioners have not shown that they held the Lincoln                    
             Mark VII for productive use in a trade or business or                    
             for investment.  Thus, even if we accepted petitioner's                  
             characterization of the transaction, section 1031 would not              
             apply in this case.  Accordingly, we reject petitioners'                 





Page:  Previous  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011