- 28 - who cleared and prepared logging roads on the premises. Id. The taxpayer also made incidental sales of two walnut trees to the woodsman and of firewood generated from the clearing activities. Id. Nevertheless, observing that the taxpayer had not acquired an already functioning business and citing Richmond Television Corp. v. United States, 345 F.2d at 907, this Court found a new business had not yet begun. Reems v. Commissioner, supra. Therefore, section 195 applied on grounds that the endeavor constituted a startup within the meaning of that statute. Id. Again, the record here does not reveal that Shrike Cars’ activities in 1998 had progressed beyond preparatory steps such as those identified in McKelvey v. Commissioner, supra, and Reems v. Commissioner, supra, or had risen to the level of formal commitment with material efforts toward a specific project as was shown by the taxpayers in Cabintaxi Corp. v. Commissioner, 63 F.3d 614 (7th Cir. 1995), Blitzer v. Commissioner, 231 Ct. Cl. 236, 684 F.2d 874 (1982), and Lamont v. United States, 80 AFTR 2d 97-7320, 97-2 USTC par. 50,861 (Fed. Cl. 1997). The Court holds that the costs claimed on petitioners’ Schedule C for Shrike Cars are startup expenditures falling within the purview of section 195. Accordingly, petitioners must capitalize such costs to the extent substantiated and are not entitled to reduce their 1998 gross income by the claimed loss of $448,120 derived from Shrike Cars.Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011