George R. and Barbara H. Burrus - Page 20

                                       - 20 -                                         
          depreciation are directly attributable to the holding of the land           
          and therefore should be excluded when determining whether the               
          income from farming exceeds the deductions therefrom.  The                  
          parties disagree regarding the treatment of the conservation                
          expenses reported on the Schedules F, petitioner and respondent             
          contending that they are attributable to landholding and farming,           
          respectively.  Since a precondition for the current deduction of            
          a conservation expenditure is that the taxpayer be engaged in the           
          business of farming, see sec. 175(a), we agree with respondent              
          and conclude that the conservation expenses are not directly                
          allocable to the land for purposes of section 1.183-1(d)(1),                
          Income Tax Regs.                                                            
               Excluding the Schedule F “Other income” from income and the            
          Schedule F deductions that are “directly attributable to the                
          holding of the land”, petitioners’ “income derived from farming”            
          and “deductions attributable to * * * farming” within the meaning           
          of section 1.183-1(d)(1), Income Tax Regs., during the years in             
          issue are as follows:                                                       














Page:  Previous  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011