- 29 -
independently recognizable entity apart from its partners, and
that business conducted by a partnership is considered apart from
any business activity conducted by its partners on their own
behalves. See, e.g., Madison Gas & Elec. Co. v. Commissioner,
633 F.2d 512, 517 (7th Cir. 1980) (expenses were characterized as
“pre-operational costs” of the partnership even though the
general partner was already in the same business), affg. 72 T.C.
521 (1979); Brannen v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 471, 505 (1982)
(“the partnership is an independently recognizable entity apart
from its partners for the purposes of the calculation of its
taxable income under section 703”), affd. 722 F.2d 695 (11th Cir.
1984); see also Polakof v. Commissioner, 820 F.2d 321, 323 (9th
Cir. 1987) (in characterizing partnership income “it is the
dominant economic motive of the partnership, not that of the
individual investors, that is determinative”), affg. T.C. Memo.
1985-197; Tallal v. Commissioner, 778 F.2d 275, 276 (5th Cir.
1985) (“When the taxpayer is a member of a partnership, we have
interpreted 26 U.S.C. � 702(b) to require that business purpose
must be assessed at the partnership level.”), affg. T.C. Memo.
1984-486. Moreover, petitioner was a limited partner of MSPR,
Ltd. He did not actively participate in the conduct of the
partnership business.
The frequency of the taxpayer’s sales “is highly probative
in the real estate context because the presence of frequent sales
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011