- 11 - treasure salvaging activity for purposes of section 183.1 There, after noting that the taxpayer’s record keeping “left something to be desired”, we said: The treasure hunting activity was different from petitioner’s other businesses. Different record keeping methods are therefore expected, and lack of record keeping is not determinative of intent. Treasure hunting is not the type of business where thorough records of gains and losses are necessary to a successful operation. Cf. Farrell v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1983-542. This type of activity is likely to generate only expenditures with no income until a find is made at which time the income will come in one lump sum. * * * [Id.] Here, as in the Harrison case, petitioner kept no formal set of books and records for his gold mining and prospecting activity. He did not maintain a general ledger or a spreadsheet. No financial statements ever were prepared, except a balance sheet prepared for petitioner’s meeting with an IRS Appeals officer. Petitioner did have a business plan, but it was written in December 2000, long after the years in issue. Petitioner did not maintain a separate bank account for his gold mining activity. Petitioner’s record keeping consisted of the maintenance of separate folders for his expenses. As he incurred each expense, he put the receipt in the appropriate folder. 1The Court treated the taxpayer’s gold mining and treasure salvaging operations as one activity for purposes of sec. 183.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