William Lenehan III and Barbara Lenehan - Page 16




                                       - 15 -                                         
          income.  See H. Rept. 103-111, at 641-642 (1993), 1993-3 C.B.               
          167, 217-218; H. Conf. Rept. 103-213, at 578 (1993), 1993-3 C.B.            
          393, 456.  To that end, Congress intended to account for                    
          “taxable” capital gains for purposes of section 163(d).  To                 
          accept a broader reading to include nontaxable capital gains                
          would thus defeat the purpose of the section 163(d)(1)                      
          limitation.                                                                 
               C.  Analysis                                                           
               For the reasons stated below, we conclude that petitioners’            
          loss carryover is an item of investment income under section                
          163(d)(4)(B) and, accordingly, that it serves to limit                      
          petitioners’ investment interest expense deduction to $5,044.               
               Petitioners contend that respondent mischaracterized their             
          investment income by including the loss carryover.  Petitioners             
          argue that section 163(d)(4)(ii) requires inclusion of only their           
          short-term capital gains and, furthermore, that net gain and net            
          capital gain do not require inclusion of their loss carryover.              
          On brief, petitioners argue that Zohoury v. Commissioner, T.C.              
          Memo. 1983-597, and section 4940(c)(4)(C) support their                     
          contention.  We reject petitioners’ arguments.                              
               First, petitioners’ reliance on Zohoury is misplaced.  The             
          issue in Zohoury involved whether interest paid on an intra-                
          family indebtedness constituted investment interest.  After                 
          concluding that the taxpayers’ intrafamily indebtedness interest            






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