- 9 - made by them on residences of which legal title was held by a sibling of the taxpayer. These cases, however, are distinguishable from the instant case. In Golder v. Commissioner, supra, the taxpayers were guarantors of a debt of their corporation, which debt was also secured by the taxpayers' home. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the indebtedness in that case was not that of the taxpayers but, rather, was that of the corporation, and that the taxpayers had merely guaranteed that debt. That is not the situation in this case. In Loria v. Commissioner, supra, and Song v. Commissioner, supra, the taxpayers made mortgage payments on residences upon which legal title was held in each case by the taxpayer's brother. In both cases, the taxpayer's brother was also indebted to a third party commercial mortgage lender in connection with such residence. In both cases, the Court denied mortgage interest deductions to the taxpayers for the reason that the taxpayers had failed to prove that they held any equitable or beneficial ownership in the residences. In the cases relied on by respondent, the Court held that the subject indebtedness was not that of the taxpayer, and that the taxpayer did not have an ownership interest in the mortgaged property. In the instant case, petitioners' agreement with Haluk and Aysun coupled with petitioners' continued occupancy of the AlisalPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011