Kenneth J. Nissley and Terri C. Connor Nissley - Page 13

                                               - 13 -                                                  

            activities; (6) the taxpayer's history of income or losses with                            
            respect to the activity; (7) the amount of occasional profits, if                          
            any, which are earned; (8) the financial status of the taxpayer;                           
            and (9) any elements indicating personal pleasure or recreation.                           
            See sec. 1.183-2(b), Income Tax Regs.                                                      
                  No single factor, nor even the existence of a majority of                            
            factors favoring or disfavoring the existence of a profit                                  
            objective, is controlling.  See id.  Rather, the relevant facts                            
            and circumstances of the case are determinative.  See Golanty v.                           
            Commissioner, 72 T.C. 411, 426 (1979), affd. without published                             
            opinion 647 F.2d 170 (9th Cir. 1981).                                                      
                  Based on all of the facts and circumstances in the present                           
            case, we hold that petitioners have failed to prove that they                              
            engaged in their Amway activity for profit within the meaning of                           
            section 183.  See Rule 142(a); INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner,                              
            supra; Welch v. Helvering, supra; Elliott v. Commissioner, supra.                          
                  We will not analyze in depth all 9 of the factors enumerated                         
            in the regulation but rather focus on some of the more important                           
            ones that inform our decision.                                                             
                  First, the history of consistent and substantial losses                              
            incurred by petitioners in their Amway activity is indicative of                           
            a lack of profit objective.  See Golanty v. Commissioner, supra                            
            at 427; sec. 1.183-2(b)(6), Income Tax Regs.  Since the inception                          
            of their Amway activity in mid-1991, petitioners have never                                

Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011