- 45 - the foundation or by more than 21 percent as a result of damage to the exterior brick and the need to cover the brick with vinyl siding. Because the wreck on the beach lot has now been covered by sand and the beach replenished by ocean tides and the beach replenishment program of the City of Gulf Shores, Alabama, the loss in value of the beach lot from erosion was not permanent and is not a casualty loss. See Bidelspacher v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1980-538. Moreover, it is improbable the beach lot would now be worthless as a result of beach erosion that has since been remedied. Further, the record contains no evidence, such as reduction in value of similar houses as a result of similar damage, cost of repairing similar damage, reduction in value of similar beach lots as a result of beach erosion, cost of replenishing the lost sand, etc. upon which we might exercise our judgment to estimate the amount of the loss or losses in value from the 1997 earthquakes or Hurricane Georges12 under Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 540 (2d Cir. 1930). See Williams v. United States, 245 12We have no confidence whatsoever that any amount of loss we might estimate on the basis of cost of repairs would equal or exceed the additional amount--$69,314--needed to reach the 10 percent of AGI threshold provided by sec. 165(h). See supra notes 8 and 9 and accompanying text.Page: Previous 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011