Curtis R. and Lynn Bitker - Page 21

                                       - 21 -                                         
               A.   Whether Payments Made by the Bitker Partnership on                
                    Indebtedness Owed by Petitioners Are Rental Expenses of           
                    the Bitker Partnership or Constructive Distributions to           
                    Petitioners From the Bitker Partnership                           
               The Bitker partnership claimed a deduction for interest it             
          paid on mortgages against petitioners’ farmland.  Respondent                
          disallowed the deduction.  That disallowance resulted in  increases         
          in petitioners’ distributive shares of partnership farming income,          
          which is reported on Schedule F.                                            
               Respondent determined that the interest on the mortgages               
          represented petitioners’ individual expenses (as opposed to                 
          partnership expenses) reportable as  rental expenses on Schedule E          
          of petitioners’ returns and that the deductibility of that interest         
          is subject to the passive loss rules of section 469. Those                  
          adjustments resulted in  increases in petitioners’ self-employment          
          tax.  The parties agree that the interest payments totaled $242,964         
          in 1996 and $128,988 in 1997 and that petitioner husbands each              
          constructively received half of each year’s payment.  Moreover,             
          petitioners concede the reclassification of the claimed Schedule F          
          interest expenses on the Bitker partnership’s returns as Schedule           
          E rental expenses  on  petitioners’  returns;  further,  they               
          acknowledge that the losses from their rental real estate activity          
          are subject to the passive loss limitations of section 469.                 
          Petitioners contend, however, that the principal and interest paid          
          by the Bitker partnership should be treated as payments by it for           
          use of petitioners’ land.  In effect, petitioners are asserting             





Page:  Previous  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011