Frank Chen - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         
          request, pursuant to section 301.9100-3, Proced. & Admin. Regs.,            
          for an extension of time to make the election, and (2) respondent           
          improperly denied that request.                                             
               B.  Respondent’s Argument                                              
               Respondent argues that petitioner’s brief foray into high-             
          volume, short-term securities trading, during 1999, was of                  
          insufficient duration to enable him to qualify as a “trader in              
          securities” for purposes of section 475(f)(1).                              
               Respondent further argues that, even if petitioner qualified           
          as a trader in securities as of January 1, 1999, he failed to               
          make an effective mark-to-market election under section 475(f)              
          and Rev. Proc. 99-17, 1999-1 C.B. 503, pursuant to which an                 
          election effective for taxable years beginning on or after                  
          January 1, 1999, should have been filed “not later than the due             
          date (without regard to extensions) of the original * * * return            
          for the taxable year immediately preceding the election year”,              
          or, in this case, by April 15, 1999, the due date of petitioner’s           
          1998 return.  See Rev. Proc. 99-17, 1999-1 C.B. at 504.                     
               Lastly, respondent argues that petitioner “never made a                
          request for an extension of time to make the [section 475(f)]               
          election.”                                                                  











Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011