Assaf F. Al Assaf and Rehab Assaf - Page 10

                                       - 10 -                                         
          and Kessler involved maintaining and servicing equipment, AGI               
          provided extensive services.7                                               
               Only one case has previously determined that the services              
          provided were extraordinary.  Welch v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.             
          1998-310.  Welch involved personal service contracts in which the           
          taxpayer, a carpenter, contracted with movie production companies           
          to construct movie sets.  The taxpayer also leased tools and                
          equipment to the production companies.  The Court found that the            
          movie company’s primary motivation was to obtain the taxpayer’s             
          services and not to lease his equipment.  Id.  Similarly, we find           
          that AGI’s attorney-tenants leased from AGI primarily to obtain             
          its legal support services and not to lease its office space.               
               The regulations provide examples regarding when the                    
          extraordinary personal services exception might apply.  Two                 
          examples concern the use by patients of a hospital’s boarding               
          facilities and the use by students of a boarding school’s                   
          dormitories.8  See sec. 1.469-1T(e)(3)(v), Temporary Income Tax             
          Regs., supra at 5702.  In each, the use of the premises was                 

               7Further, the Court in Hairston v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.            
          2000-386, stated that no credible evidence supported taxpayers’             
          contention that extraordinary services were performed.  The Court           
          found, rather, that the taxpayers individually had “little or no            
          responsibility” for maintaining the equipment under the lease,              
          and that the taxpayers merely “serviced and maintained” equipment           
          they rented.  In contrast, the record supports petitioners’                 
          contention that petitioner wife was continuously engaged in                 
          providing extensive legal support services.                                 
               8Additional examples in the regulations address the                    
          extraordinary personal services exception in the context of                 
          leasing photographic equipment, leasing tractor trailers, and               
          leasing a taxi.  See sec. 1.469-1T(e)(3)(viii), Examples (1),               
          (3), (9), Temporary Income Tax Regs., supra at 5703-5704.  We do            
          not find these examples analogous to our facts.                             




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011