- 17 -
property to rent it out, they never carried through with an
intention to do so. Moreover, this Court is not bound to accept
a taxpayer's self-serving, unverified, and undocumented
testimony. Tokarski v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 74, 77 (1986).
Petitioner has simply not shown to the Court’s satisfaction that
the purchase of the condominium was for profit from business or
investment; thus, no deduction under section 165(c)(1) or (2) is
allowed. The Court further holds that the property was purchased
for personal, living, and family purposes. As a result, under
section 262, its loss is not deductible. See Austin v.
Commissioner, 298 F.2d 583 (2d Cir. 1962), affg. 35 T.C. 221
(1960). Respondent is sustained on this issue.
Petitioner also claimed a $42,500 investment loss on a
Simbari painting.9 The painting was transferred to the settlement
estate in the FTC case and never returned to petitioner. The
loss of the painting is not deductible by petitioner under
section 165(c)(1) or (2) as a loss from a transaction entered
into for profit. The painting was displayed in petitioner’s home
and was never used for a business or investment purpose. Despite
Mr. Blodgett’s claim to have bought the painting as an
investment, no credible evidence was presented as to petitioner's
9 The purchase price of the painting was $85,000.
Because she jointly owned the painting with Mr. Blodgett,
petitioner claimed one-half of its cost as her loss deduction.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011