Matthew W. Norwood and Linda D. Kramer - Page 3

                                        - 3 -                                         

          their 1995 Federal tax return.  Petitioners did not report or pay           
          any self-employment tax on this amount.                                     
               In pertinent part, respondent determined that petitioner was           
          subject to self-employment tax of $7,928, which, after the                  
          deduction for one-half of the self-employment tax under section             
          164(f), resulted in a net adjustment of $3,964.                             
               Section 1401 imposes a tax upon a taxpayer's self-employment           
          income.  Self-employment income includes the "net earnings from             
          self-employment" derived by an individual during the taxable                
          year.  Sec. 1402(b).  Section 1402(a) provides, subject to                  
          exceptions, that "net earnings from self-employment" includes a             
          partner's distributive share of partnership trade or business               
          income.  One of the exceptions to the general rule provides that            
          a limited partner's share of partnership income is not subject to           
          self-employment tax.  Sec. 1402(a)(13).  Neither party contends             
          that any of the other exceptions would be relevant in this case.            
               Petitioners argue that petitioner's interest in Gallant is             
          passive, and, therefore, any distributions from the partnership             
          should not be subject to self-employment tax.  Respondent                   
          contends that the distribution from Gallant is subject to self-             
          employment tax regardless of whether petitioner's involvement is            
          passive or active, because petitioner is a general partner.                 
               We agree with respondent.  It is undisputed that                       
          petitioner's interest in Gallant was a general partnership                  





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011