Abraham and Dina Weiss - Page 15




                                       - 15 -                                         

          Commissioner, 87 T.C. 970, 976 (1986); the structure of the                 
          financing, Helba v. Commissioner, supra at 1007-1011; whether               
          there was a shifting of the burdens and benefits of ownership,              
          Rose v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 386, 410 (1987), affd. 868 F.2d 851           
          (6th Cir. 1989); the degree of adherence to contractual terms,              
          Helba v. Commissioner, supra at 1007-1011; and the reasonableness           
          of the income projections, Rice's Toyota World, Inc. v.                     
          Commissioner, 81 T.C. 184, 204-207 (1983), affd. in part, revd.             
          in part and remanded 752 F.2d 89 (4th Cir. 1985).                           
               Petitioners presented no pertinent evidence regarding their            
          equity in Oshtemo-Kalamazoo or the prospect of economic success             
          beyond very conclusory assertions that Mr. Weiss thought that               
          investing in a cable television system would be profitable.  They           
          gave no hint as to the content or nature of any negotiations                
          employed in acquiring the property, nor did they establish the              
          sale price or the actual value of the assets at issue.  As to the           
          structure of the financing, we are told only that Oshtemo-                  
          Kalamazoo issued a note to acquire a cable television system in             
          1976.  The note was nonrecourse, and petitioner Abraham Weiss did           
          not have personal liability on the note.  This information is not           
          particularly instructive as to the issue of profit objective.               
               Petitioners have given us no specifics as to any shifting of           
          the burdens and benefits of ownership, except for our being told            
          that an entity named Acton CATV acquired the assets some years              
          after those in issue.  Nor have they provided information                   
          regarding the degree of adherence to contractual terms or the               

Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011