- 9 -
(9th Cir. 1981). "A taxpayer's mere statement of intent is given
less weight than the objective facts of the case." Burger v.
Commissioner, supra at 358.
In deciding whether an activity is engaged in for profit, we
may take into account the following nonexclusive factors:
(1) The manner in which the taxpayer carries on the activity;
(2) the expertise of the taxpayer or his or her adviser; (3) the
time and effort expended by the taxpayer in carrying on the
activity; (4) the expectation that assets used in the activity
may appreciate in value; (5) the success of the taxpayer in
carrying on similar or dissimilar activities; (6) the taxpayer's
history of income or losses in the activity; (7) the amount of
occasional profits, if any, that are earned; (8) the financial
status of the taxpayer; and (9) the elements of personal pleasure
or recreation. Sec. 1.183-2(b), Income Tax Regs. None of these
factors is dispositive, in and of itself, and a decision does not
rest on the number of factors satisfied. Golanty v.
Commissioner, supra at 426; sec. 1.183-2(b)(3), Income Tax Regs.
In applying these factors in the context of section 174, we
are mindful that the taxpayer's current activities need only be
aimed at enabling the taxpayer to engage in a trade or business
"at some time". Green v. Commissioner, supra at 686. With that
focus in mind, we will concentrate our analysis on the first five
factors mentioned above and on factors eight and nine.
Petitioner contends he is in the trade or business of being
an inventor. He argues, therefore, that the analysis of the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011