- 6 - Contrary to the above authority and for the limited purpose of determining the deductibility of losses under section 165(c)(2) relating to the amount of cash invested in partnerships, petitioners argue that the absence of a profit objective at the partnership level should be irrelevant, and the profit objective test should be measured only at the individual partner level. Petitioners rely on Echols v. Commissioner, 935 F.2d 703, 709 (5th Cir. 1991), revg. and remanding 93 T.C. 553 (1989), as supporting a loss deduction for the amount of cash they invested in White Rim. In Echols, however, the profit objective of the partnership was not at issue. The Echols case involved what was treated as a legitimate for-profit partnership, and the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit addressed only the timing and manifestation of the taxpayers' abandonment of their interest in the partnership and the worthlessness of their interest in the partnership. Because the profit objective of the partnership was not challenged, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Echols examined only the profit objective at the individual investor level. The parties stipulate that White Rim's transactions, for all relevant purposes, were identical to those of Technology 1980, one of the partnerships involved in Krause v. Commissioner, 99 T.C. 132 (1992), in which we concluded that the activities andPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011