- 61 -
escrowed funds were not released, if at all, until sometime after
1990.
(5) Petitioner paid architect and designer fees with respect
to Suite 11. Petitioner also paid for the improvements made to
Suite 11.
(6) In October 1989, petitioner’s law office was
burglarized. The burglary caused damage to the doorway, but the
developer refused to repair the damage. Petitioner made the
necessary repairs.
(7) By the time petitioner’s tax returns for the years at
issue were prepared, the developer’s interest in 1410 Energy
Drive had been foreclosed. It is reasonable to assume,
therefore, that all amounts paid with respect to Suite 11 during
the years at issue, except for the development costs that were
depreciated (Ex. 38-R, lines 222-228) and the interest on the
business loan, were deducted by Mr. Aunan as rent. However, the
record does not give us sufficient information to estimate the
amount of rent or rent equivalent that petitioner paid during
1988-90.
We conclude that petitioner paid rent for her law office
during 1987 in the amount of $3,820, as shown on the chart at
page 79 of this opinion. We lack sufficient information to
estimate petitioner’s rent expense for 1988-90.
Page: Previous 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011