J. Michael and Susan Reimer - Page 14




                                       - 13 -                                         


          G.   Appreciation of Property                                               
               The assets of petitioners’ horse breeding activity consist             
          of the horses.  Ms. Bak was purchased in 1979 for $15,000.  In              
          1981, Ms. Bak was insured for $40,000.  In petitioners’ proposed            
          1985 partnership offering, drafted by petitioners, Sassafras and            
          Tender Moment were valued at $200,000 and $300,000, respectively.           
          At trial, Mr. Reimer estimated the collective value of Ms. Bak,             
          Tender Moment, and Sassafras in 1993 to range between $30,000 and           
          $50,000.  No expert testimony was given at trial to support Mr.             
          Reimer’s valuations, the insurance record valuation, or the 1985            
          partnership offering valuation.  Furthermore, no estimated value            
          was given for Jessica’s Melody which was sold in 1994 for $2,500.           
          H.   Petitioners’ Advisers                                                  
               Petitioners consulted an accountant in 1976 “when we set up            
          the business”.  Petitioners showed the accountant their books and           
          records and were purportedly told by the accountant that they               
          could handle the record keeping themselves, and that “it would be           
          a waste of money” to hire the accountant.  According to Mr.                 
          Reimer they did not discuss what amounts were deductible because            
          Mr. Reimer “knew I could” take the deductions.  Mr. Reimer read             
          the regulations and the Internal Revenue Code and filed their               
          returns based upon his research.  At times Mr. Reimer consulted             
          with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).  Prior to the audit of             
          this case, petitioners were never audited by the IRS.                       





Page:  Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011