- 24 - OPINION I. LFI Issues In a far-ranging and sometimes unfocused attack on LFI, respondent, in his notices of deficiency, asserted numerous grounds for disallowing LFI’s deductions and recalculating LFI’s distributive net income for the years at issue: (1) Petitioner has not established the amounts in question were paid or incurred in a trade or business; (2) Granot Loma was never transferred to LFI by petitioners and, therefore, LFI is not entitled to depreciate Granot Loma; (3) petitioner has not established that he was at risk with respect to LFI; (4) petitioner has not established that “the activity” was entered into for profit; (5) petitioner has not established that “the transaction” had economic substance; (6) petitioner has not established that the claimed losses were incurred or were otherwise allowable; and (7) petitioner has not established that “the amounts claimed as payments were paid, and if paid, were for the purpose as stated.” Although the parties devoted most of their arguments on brief to the issue of whether LFI was a trade or business under section 162 or an activity not engaged in for profit within the meaning of section 183, the parties also addressed the other grounds raised in the notices of deficiency as well as an additional argument under section 280A that was not enumerated in, or expressly raised by, the notices of deficiency. Because we believe that the issue regarding the proper tax treatment ofPage: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011