Fawzi and Dolores Tay Tay Assaad - Page 28

                                       - 28 -                                         
          entire amount of the loans from First National was paid into the            
          Atherton project.  Thus, petitioners did not provide any                    
          reasonable evidentiary basis for estimating the deductible                  
          expenses that were paid with proceeds of those loans.  For                  
          similar reasons, petitioners did not establish what amounts of              
          the interest payments were made on account of expenditures for              
          the Atherton project.22                                                     
               6.  Other Expenses (“Soft Costs”)                                      
               Petitioners claim that they incurred certain “soft costs”23            
          in constructing the Atherton houses and that those soft costs               
          were not a part of the loans from Pacific, First National, or               
          California Federal.  They contend that those loans covered only             


               22Relatedly, in petitioners’ reply brief, they point to a              
          $120,012 excess passive investment carried over from 1991.  On a            
          Schedule E, Supplemental Income and Loss (From rents,                       
          partnerships, estates, trusts, REMICs, etc.), attached to their             
          1991 return, petitioners reported expenses from a rental property           
          located at Atherton.  Those expenses consist of $469 insurance,             
          $113,812 mortgage interest paid to banks, $1,200 taxes, $4,231              
          utilities, and $300 gardening.  Petitioners claim that $6,200               
          ($120,012 minus $113,812 interest expense) of this amount is                
          allowable in computing their NOL for 1992.  We disagree.                    
          Petitioners provided no substantiation for those purported                  
          expenses other than their return.  Further, it is conceivable               
          that those expenses were paid from the construction loan proceeds           
          and not from petitioners’ own resources.                                    
               23Mr. Butler testified that banks normally refer to “hard              
          costs” and “soft costs”.  Soft costs include legal fees, owner’s            
          insurance, utilities, and other costs not related to the                    
          construction of the job.  Hard costs include architect fees,                
          permit fees, management fees, and job insurance.  Costs relating            
          to business vehicles would normally be soft costs, unless they              
          were related to the construction job.                                       





Page:  Previous  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011