- 2 - reconsideration of opinion (motion for leave) and petitioners’ motion for reconsideration of opinion and memorandum brief in support thereof (motion for reconsideration) regarding our opinion in Rinehart v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-71 (Rinehart II). Respondent determined deficiencies in and penalties on petitioners’ Federal income taxes as follows: Penalty Docket No. Year Deficiency Sec. 6662 20185-98 1994 $46,894 $9,379 15968-99 1995 29,264 5,853 15969-99 1995 28,765 5,753 15969-99 1996 53,869 10,774 7007-00 1996 27,032 5,406 In Rinehart v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-9 (Rinehart I), we addressed the issue of whether Dale A. Rinehart’s (Mr. Rinehart) horse breeding activity was an activity not engaged in for profit for 1994, 1995, and 1996. In Rinehart II, we addressed the issues of whether petitioners had cancellation of indebtedness income (COD income) for 1995 and whether petitioners were liable for penalties pursuant to section 6662(a).2 In Rinehart I and Rinehart II, we made no findings and reached no conclusions regarding petitioners’ marital status for Federal income tax purposes. 2 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the years in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011