- 49 - respective uses during those years of certain Burien Nissan automobiles.41 On that record, we sustain those determinations. Petitioners’ Claimed Deductions for Certain Mortgage Interest and Property Taxes Respondent determined to disallow any deductions for mort- gage interest and property taxes claimed by petitioners for each year at issue in excess of the deductions claimed by them for each such year for mortgage interest and property taxes paid with respect to the Sumner property.42 The parties agree that the mortgage interest and property taxes at issue are attributable to the debt that Mr. Whitehead and Essie Whitehead incurred when they refinanced the Kirkland property in February 1994. The parties’ disputes are whether Mr. Whitehead paid any portion of the disallowed mortgage interest and property taxes and, if he did pay a portion of the mortgage interest at issue, whether that interest constitutes qualified 41We note that, when Mr. Stanford was president of Burien Nissan, his employment agreement provided that he was entitled to unrestricted access to two Burien Nissan automobiles for his personal use. Mr. Whitehead could have received the same benefit when he became president of Burien Nissan. 42Respondent also determined to disallow the deduction for points not reported in Form 1098 that petitioners claimed with respect to the Kirkland property for each year at issue. Peti- tioners make no argument on brief with respect to their entitle- ment to the deduction that they claimed for each year at issue for those points. We conclude that petitioners have abandoned contesting respondent’s determinations disallowing the deductions claimed for those points. See Rybak v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 524, 566 n.19 (1988).Page: Previous 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011