Mun Li Fong - Page 3

                                        - 3 -                                         

          petitioner.2  Among assets distributed to petitioner were four              
          parcels of real property located in Sacramento, California                  
          (the properties).                                                           
               On petitioner's 1986 individual Federal income tax return              
          that was filed on April 15, 1987, petitioner reported a total               
          cumulative net value of $147,262 for the properties and other               
          assets she received on liquidation of LY Enterprises, a basis of            
          $75,000 for her stock in LY Enterprises and a capital gain of               
          $72,262 relating to the liquidating distribution she received               
          from LY Enterprises.                                                        
               In 1987, petitioner contributed the properties that she                
          received in 1986 on liquidation of LY Enterprises to the Lily               
          Company, a California limited partnership in which petitioner               
          owned a partnership interest (the Lily Partnership).                        
               On the Lily Partnership’s 1989 U.S. Partnership Return of              
          Income (Form 1065), based upon total claimed depreciable tax                
          bases of $1,912,764 in the properties, a total depreciation                 
          expense of $89,285 was claimed relating to the properties.                  
               On her individual 1989 Federal income tax return, petitioner           
          claimed a proportionate share of the $89,285 depreciation expense           



          2    The distribution appears to have been made to a revocable              
          trust that petitioner established.  The parties herein and the              
          Court treat the properties as if distributed directly to                    
          petitioner, and we make no further reference to petitioner’s                
          revocable trust.                                                            




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011