-2- for an accuracy-related penalty for negligence under section 6662(c) of $5,836 for 1990 and $7,187 for 1991. During the years in issue, petitioner deducted certain costs related to establishing public display gardens on her farm. Respondent determined that the display gardens and the farm were separate activities, and that petitioner did not operate the display gardens with a profit objective. See sec. 183. After concessions, the issues for decision are: 1. Whether, for purposes of section 183, petitioner's display gardens undertaking1 (known as Broadmoor Gardens) and farming undertaking are one activity, as petitioner contends, or two activities, as respondent contends. We hold that they are one activity. Respondent concedes that petitioner prevails on the section 183 issue if Broadmoor Gardens and petitioner's farm are one activity. Thus, we hold that petitioner operated Broadmoor Gardens for profit in 1990 and 1991. 2. Whether, as respondent contends, depreciation of the addition to petitioner's residence built in 1988 and 1989, which includes a conservatory used for Broadmoor Gardens, is subject to the restrictions of section 280A. We hold that it is. 1 For purposes of sec. 183, two or more "undertakings" may be one "activity". Sec. 1.183-1(d)(1), Income Tax Regs. We refer to the display gardens and farm as "undertakings" because one of the issues in dispute is whether they were one activity.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011