Steven K. Stoddard and Ellen M. Stoddard - Page 24




                                       - 24 -                                         
          that record, we further find that petitioners have failed to show           
          that their cost basis of $165,000 in the condo should not be                
          reduced by depreciation of $5,491 for each of the years 1993,               
          1994, and 1995.  On the instant record, we find that petitioners            
          have failed to show that their adjusted basis in the condo at the           
          time of its sale was greater than $148,527 (i.e., petitioners’              
          cost basis of $165,000 reduced by depreciation of $5,491 for each           
          of the years 1993, 1994, and 1995).                                         
               Based upon our examination of the entire record before us,             
          we find that petitioners have failed to show that they did not              
          realize a long-term capital gain of $62,473 on the sale of the              
          condo (i.e., sales price of $211,000 minus petitioners’ adjusted            
          basis in the condo of $148,527).  On that record, we further find           
          that petitioners have failed to show that they did not understate           
          their long-term capital gain for 1995 on the sale of the condo by           
          $37,269 (i.e., petitioners’ long-term capital gain of $62,473               
          reduced by the long-term capital gain of $25,204 that petitioners           
          reported in Schedule D of their 1995 joint return).                         





               13(...continued)                                                       
          a reduction in calculating petitioners’ adjusted basis in the               
          condo, was computed for the period that began on Jan. 1, 1995,              
          and ended on July 20, 1995, when petitioners sold the condo.  If            
          our belief is correct, respondent’s position that depreciation of           
          only $5,491 for each of the years 1993 and 1994 during which                
          petitioners rented the condo must also be reflected as a reduc-             
          tion in calculating petitioners’ adjusted basis in the condo                
          would be advantageous to petitioners.                                       




Page:  Previous  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011