- 16 -
sioner, 94 T.C. 41, 46 (1990); Hulter v. Commissioner, 91
T.C. 371, 393 (1988); Beck v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 557,
569 (1985); Dreicer v. Commissioner, supra; Golanty v.
Commissioner, 72 T.C. 411, 425-426 (1979), affd. without
published opinion 647 F.2d 170 (9th Cir. 1981); sec. 1.183-
2(a), Income Tax Regs. "Profit" in this context means
economic profit, independent of tax savings. See Hayden
v. Commissioner, 889 F.2d 1548, 1552 (6th Cir. 1989), affg.
T.C. Memo. 1988-310; Antonides v. Commissioner, 91 T.C.
686, 694 (1988), affd. 893 F.2d 656 (4th Cir. 1990);
Landry v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 1284, 1303 (1986).
Whether a taxpayer engages in an activity with the
requisite profit motive is a question of fact to be
resolved on a consideration of all the facts and circum-
stances in the record. See Lemmen v. Commissioner, 77
T.C. 1326, 1340 (1981); Allen v. Commissioner, supra; sec.
1.183-2(b), Income Tax Regs. Petitioners bear the burden
of proving that they engaged in the subject activity with
the requisite profit motive, and greater weight is given to
objective facts than to petitioners' mere statement of
intent. See Rule 142(a); Siegel v. Commissioner, 78 T.C.
659, 699 (1982); Churchman v. Commissioner, 68 T.C. 696,
701 (1977); sec. 1.183-2(a), Income Tax Regs. All Rule
references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and
Procedure.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011