- 37 -
inference that petitioners lacked a profit motive.
Petitioners cite Burrow v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1990-621, in support of their position, but that case is readily
distinguishable. Burrow was concerned with the first 4 years of
losses in a horse breeding operation, not 23 years out of 26.
Moreover, in Burrow receipts for years 5 through 7 of the
operation had increased dramatically over the first 4 years,
providing evidence that the initial losses would not persist. We
concluded that because the losses were in the early period of the
activity, they were not evidence of lack of profit intent. The
patent difference in petitioners' loss history distinguishes
Burrow.
For the foregoing reasons, petitioners have failed to show
that they entered into and continued their horse-related
activities with the actual and honest objective of making a
profit. Dreicer v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 642 (1982); Golanty v.
Commissioner, supra. Likewise we believe they have failed to
show that their horse-related activities were engaged in with the
"primary" purpose of earning a profit. Cf. Westbrook v.
Commissioner, 68 F.3d 868 (5th Cir. 1995).
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered for
respondent.
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011