- 14 - 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) any elements indicating personal pleasure or recreation. 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. Id.; Ogden v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-397, affd. per curiam 244 F.3d 970 (5th Cir. 2001). Rather, the relevant facts and circumstances of the case are determinative. 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 did not engage in the Amway activity for profit within the meaning of section 183. We shall not analyze in depth all nine 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 the Amway activity is indicative of a lack of profit objective. See Golanty v. Commissioner, supra atPage: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011