- 75 -
provided scant information concerning (1) the nature of the
services Jay Hoyt performed for that partnership and (2) whether
the payments represented reasonable compensation for those
services Jay Hoyt rendered. Thus we hold that DF #1, SGE 82-1,
DGE 84-3, SGE 84-5, DGE 86-2, TBS 89-1, and TBS 90-1 are not
entitled to the deductions for guaranteed payments they claimed
for the years in issue.41 See Durkin v. Commissioner, supra at
1388-1389.
Issue 5. IRA Deductions
DF #1, DGE 84-3, and SGE 84-5 claimed deductions for some of
the years in issue for alleged individual retirement account
(IRA) contributions they made for certain of their partners.
On brief, respondent concedes some of the claimed
contributions DF #1, DGE 84-3, and SGE 84-5 made have been
substantiated. The Court thus holds that these foregoing
partnerships are entitled to IRA deductions for the years in
issue in the amounts respondent conceded. The Court further
holds that these partnerships have not substantiated and are not
entitled to their claimed IRA deductions for the years in issue
in excess of the amounts respondent conceded. See Rules 142(a),
240(a).
41It is thus unnecessary for the Court to decide whether,
for purposes of sec. 707(c), the payments Jay Hoyt received were
determined without regard to partnership income, an issue upon
which the parties disagree.
Page: Previous 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011