- 19 -
Although it does not appear that the * * *
[taxpayer] did anything herself in connection with the
management of these * * * buildings, an appreciable
amount of time and work was necessarily required on the
part of the managing agent. And if such management was
a "trade or business," the * * * [taxpayer] was so
engaged although she acted only through an agent.
[Gilford v. Commissioner, 201 F.2d 735, 736 (2d Cir.
1953).]
The principle of Gilford was more recently reaffirmed by
this Court in Whyte v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1986-486 n.22
("It is well settled that where an agent is acting on behalf of
an owner in managing a business, the owner is still considered to
be engaged in a trade or business." (Emphasis added.)), affd.
852 F.2d 306 (7th Cir. 1988). We look to whether someone acting
as an agent on behalf of petitioner to manage the timeshares was
engaged in activities sufficient to rise to the level of a trade
or business. We find that B'Mae's was engaged in a trade or
business with respect to renting the timeshares. To use the
language of the Court of Appeals, "an appreciable amount of time
and work was necessarily required on the part of" B'Mae's.
Gilford v. Commissioner, supra at 736. B'Mae's was in the
business of operating a resort hotel, and this included renting
its own single-room units. However, B'Mae's also managed the
rental of the suite units, including timeshares, owned by others.
B'Mae's took care of rental contracts, promotional advertising,
housekeeping, replenishment of inventory, and guest registration.
In short, B'Mae's' function with respect to the timeshares and to
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011