Michael and Nancy McNamara - Page 9




                                        - 9 -                                         

          by the written lease, "but to those obligations that existed                
          within the overall scheme of the farming operations which were to           
          take place" on their property.  Mizell v. Commissioner, T.C.                
          Memo. 1995-571.  (Emphasis supplied.)  These include petitioners'           
          obligations as longstanding participants in the farming business            
          as well as the "general understanding between * * * [petitioners            
          and McNamara Farms] with respect to the production of                       
          agricultural products".  Id.  Viewed in this light, the                     
          arrangement between petitioners and McNamara Farms provided, or             
          contemplated, that petitioners materially participate in the                
          production of agricultural commodities on the farmland.                     
               Mr. McNamara was candid as is evident from the following               
          question during direct examination:                                         
               Q.   And what do you do for McNamara Farms?                            
               A.   I operate the farm.  I run the farm from planting to              
                    harvest.                                                          
          Mr. McNamara claimed he made all the management decisions.  Mr.             
          McNamara asserted that his wife "was a homemaker and ran when she           
          was needed for, you know, meals or parts."  Before incorporation,           
          Mrs. McNamara did not do the bookkeeping, but otherwise performed           
          the duties outlined above.  Mr. McNamara tried to downplay his              
          wife's  participation.  Mrs. McNamara did not appear in Court,              
          even though petitioners' trial memorandum stated that both                  
          parties would testify.  Under these circumstances, we are not               





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

Last modified: May 25, 2011