Vashon C. and Beverly C. Jackson - Page 7




                                        - 7 -                                         
               Pursuant to section 280A(d)(2)(A), petitioners are deemed to           
          have used 2117 Hollins Court for personal purposes during the               
          taxable years in issue.  Since 2117 Hollins Court was not rented            
          at a fair rental for any day of the taxable years in issue, none            
          of the claimed deductions are allowable under section 280A(c)(3)            
          and (e)(1) by reason of being attributable to its rental.2  See             
          Colbert v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-30; Gilchrist v.                   
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1983-288.  The only expenses which are             
          deductible by petitioners with respect to 2117 Hollins Court are            
          those expenses which are deductible without regard to whether it            
          was rented.  See sec. 280A(b) and (e)(2).                                   
               Based on the record, we find that petitioners paid the                 
          following amounts3 with respect to 2117 Hollins Court:                      
                         Year      Interest        Taxes                              
                         1990      $4,522         $1,140                              
                         1991      6,881          1,180                               
                         1992      4,659          1,195                               


          2         It appears that respondent erroneously determined that            
          all of the substantiated expenses were deductible under sec.                
          280A(c)(3) and (e)(1) and relied only on the sec. 280A(c)(5)                
          gross income limitation.  We do not reach sec. 280A(c)(5) where,            
          as in this case, none of the disputed amounts in the first                  
          instance meet the sec. 280A(c)(3) and (e)(1) conditions for                 
          deductibility.  See sec. 280A(c)(5); Bolton v. Commissioner,                
          supra at 109.                                                               
          3         These amounts consist of the interest and taxes                   
          determined by respondent in the statutory notice of deficiency to           
          have been substantiated.  We find that petitioners have failed to           
          substantiate the "other interest" claimed by them and disallowed            
          by respondent which they claim was paid on a promissory note                
          secured by a second deed of trust on 2117 Hollins Court.                    




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

Last modified: May 25, 2011