- 11 -
return); (3) his work as a consultant (earning $40,775); and (4)
his account RSR/QRF activity, described as "Investments" on
Schedule C of petitioners' return. We found that Mr. Resser's
account QRF trading activity was separate and distinct from his
account AMR trading for Bichon and his other trading-related
activities. We thus evaluated his account QRF activity
separately and held that Mr. Resser's personal trading activity
in account QRF was not conducted with the regularity or
continuity necessary to consider the activity a trade or
business. Our holding was based on the fact that no trading
occurred in account QRF from the beginning of March 1982 until
September 30, 1982. For the balance of the year, Mr. Resser
traded TDY in account QRF on only 6 days, establishing only nine
spreads. Additionally, Mr. Resser failed to establish whether
his TDY trading consumed only a few minutes during the year or a
significant portion of several days. We concluded that Mr.
Resser's insubstantial and infrequent trading in TDY stock
options did not constitute a trade or business and that
petitioners were not entitled to deduct Mr. Resser's account QRF
losses under section 165(c)(1).
With respect to section 165(c)(2), we stated that the Court
has consistently held that, in order to deduct a loss under
section 165(c)(2), the taxpayer must show that profit was the
primary motivation for entering the transaction. We then
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