- 13 - principal residence, which does not qualify as “property held for investment”. See sec. 163(d)(5)(A). (As noted previously, there is no evidence in the record as to petitioners’ use of the $86,000 balance of the loans.) Thus, the $64,000 interest payment is not allocable to an “investment expenditure”, which is defined, in pertinent part, as “an expenditure * * * properly chargeable to capital account with respect to property held for investment”. See sec. 1.163-8T(a)(4)(C), (b)(3), Temporary Income Tax Regs., 52 Fed. Reg. 24999 (July 2, 1987). As a result, no portion of the $64,000 interest payment qualifies as “investment interest” within the meaning of section 163(h)(2)(B). E. Conclusion The $64,000 interest payment constituted the payment of nondeductible “personal interest” under section 163(h). To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered under Rule 155.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Last modified: May 25, 2011