- 22 -
Petitioner's testimony was highly ambiguous with respect to
both the activities of Thomason Solar and the existence of his
own individual solar energy activities, if any, in 1991.
Additionally, petitioner was wholly unresponsive to respondent's
request for him to enlighten the Court as to his methods for
differentiating between his corporate and noncorporate
activities. The types of expenses that petitioner asserts are
attributable to his solar energy activity in 1991 (i.e., canceled
checks) fit within the parameters of the meagerly described
purpose and activities of Thomason Solar.
Petitioner has failed to satisfy his burden of proving that
he, individually, carried on any solar energy activities in 1991
in addition to or separate from those activities conducted
through Thomason Solar. He further failed to prove that any of
the expenses he alleges are attributable to his solar energy
activity in 1991 were not properly deductible on the corporate
return of Thomason Solar.
On this record, the Court is satisfied that the expenses
petitioner alleges are attributable to his solar energy activity
in 1991 would have been properly deductible on the corporate
return of Thomason Solar, rather than on petitioners' individual
return for 1991. Consequently, the Court holds that petitioners,
as individuals, were not engaged in a solar activity as a trade
or business during 1991.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011