- 10 -
pairs of male and female) were purchased by petitioner's father
for either $28,000 or $28,500. Petitioner contends that she
purchased a one-fourth interest in the four emus from her father
and claimed a depreciation deduction of $1,036 on her 1993 income
tax return with respect to that interest. Respondent disallowed
the deduction on the ground that there was no evidence that
petitioner had purchased any interest in the emus from her
father. Respondent, therefore, determined that petitioner did
not have a basis in the asset; therefore, petitioner could not
claim a depreciation deduction.
There was no bill of sale offered into evidence to reflect
the purchase of a one-fourth interest in the emus by petitioner.
Petitioner's father agreed that no monetary consideration was
paid to him by petitioner; however, he stated that petitioner was
obligated to pay for her interest in the birds by taking care of
them. No promissory note or other evidence of indebtedness was
executed by petitioner. There was some reference at trial to a
letter prepared by petitioner's father that stated that
petitioner would pay the interest on an indebtedness, but the
document admittedly failed to state that petitioner was liable
for the principal. The document was not offered into evidence,
nor was any documentary evidence presented to reflect what time
or care petitioner expended on the emus.
Under section 167(c), the basis for the deduction for
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011