Sandra J. Brannon - Page 9




                                        - 9 -                                         

          realize a profit on the entire operation which presupposes not              
          only future net earnings but also sufficient net earnings to                
          recoup the losses which have meanwhile been sustained in the                
          intervening years"), affd. 379 F.2d 252 (2d Cir. 1967).                     
          Respondent, therefore, is sustained on this issue.                          
               Having concluded that petitioner's horse breeding activity             
          was not engaged in for profit, the Court finds it unnecessary to            
          consider respondent's alternative determination that some of the            
          expenses claimed in connection with the activity were not                   
          substantiated.                                                              
               With respect to the third issue, petitioner and her father             
          began an emu breeding business in 1993.2  Although the record is            
          not clear, it appears that this activity was also conducted on              
          the same property with petitioner's horse breeding activity.                
               The only issue with respect to the emu activity is                     
          petitioner's claim to a depreciation deduction of $1,036 on her             
          1993 Federal income tax return with respect to four emus that               
          were purchased in September 1993.3  The four emus (two matched              



               2    An emu is defined as any of various flightless birds,             
          including a swift-running Australian bird with underdeveloped               
          wings that is related to and smaller than the ostrich.  See                 
          Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary 408 (1985).                       
               3    Petitioner reported the emu activity on a separate                
          Schedule C of her 1993 and 1994 income tax returns.  Respondent             
          did not challenge the activity as an activity not engaged in for            
          profit under sec. 183.                                                      





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011