- 9 -
taxpayer carries on the activity; (2) the expertise of the
taxpayer or his advisers; (3) the time and effort expended by the
taxpayer in carrying on the activity; (4) the expectation that
the assets used in the activity may appreciate in value; (5) the
success of the taxpayer in carrying on other similar or
dissimilar 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) elements of personal pleasure or
recreation.
No single factor, nor the existence of even a majority of
the factors, is controlling, but rather it is an evaluation of
all the facts and circumstances in the case, taken as a whole,
which is determinative. Keanini v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 41, 47
(1990); sec. 1.183-2(b), Income Tax Regs. These factors are not
all applicable or appropriate for every case. Abramson v.
Commissioner, 86 T.C. 360, 371 (1986). In making our evaluation
of the foregoing factors, we may consider evidence from years
subsequent to the years in issue “to the extent it may create
inferences regarding the existence of a profit motive in the
earlier years.” Hillman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-255
(citing Hoyle v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-592 and Smith v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-140).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011