- 22 -
on farm activities); Ellis v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1984-50
(taxpayer spending 30 to 35 hours per week engaged in care and
training of his horses). Also, even where lesser amounts have
been validated as evidence of profit objective, the expenditures
have typically been regular and consistent. See, e.g., Givens v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1989-529 (taxpayer spent 2 to 4 hours
daily on weekdays doing farm chores and more time on weekends);
Christensen v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1988-484 (taxpayer worked
11 consecutive days at another occupation, during which time he
usually spent several evening hours on his challenged activities,
then worked 4 consecutive days of at least 8 hours each on his
challenged venture).
Here, in contrast, petitioner testified to going to the
ranch only 15 to 17 times a year during the years at issue and
spending 3 to 4 days per visit. No evidence was presented as to
the hours of labor expended while there. Furthermore, while
limited time spent may be excused where a taxpayer employs
competent personnel to carry on the activity, sec. 1.183-2(b)(3),
Income Tax Regs., petitioner offered no record of having hired
anyone to run his ranching operations. Thus, the time and effort
devoted by petitioner amounted, on average, to visiting
approximately once or twice a month, for the equivalent of a long
weekend. On these facts, petitioner’s level of involvement would
appear to be more akin to a hobby than a business.
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011