- 14 -
the petition. See Bertolino v. Commissioner, 930 F.2d 759, 761
(9th Cir. 1991), affg. an unpublished decision of this Court;
Sher v. Commissioner, supra at 134-135. Ordinarily, we consider
the reasonableness of each of these positions separately. See
Huffman v. Commissioner, 978 F.2d 1139, 1144-1147 (9th Cir.
1992), affg. in part, revg. in part and remanding on other issues
T.C. Memo. 1991-144. In the present case, however, we need not
consider two separate positions because there is no indication
that respondent's position changed or that respondent became
aware of any additional facts that rendered his position any more
or less justified between the issuance of the notice of
deficiency (on August 29, 1997) and the filing of the answer to
the petition (on January 9, 1998).
In order to decide whether respondent's position was
substantially justified we must review the substantive merits of
this case.
Respondent determined that petitioner’s horse activity was
not engaged in with a profit objective. Thus, we inquire whether
respondent had a reasonable basis in fact and law for determining
that petitioner did not engage in his horse activity with an
actual and honest objective of earning a profit. See Dreicer v.
Commissioner, 78 T.C. 642, 645 (1982), affd. without opinion 702
F.2d 1205 (D.C. Cir. 1983).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011