- 15 - petitioner wife materially participated in the nonrental activity. See sec. 469(c)(1), (h)(1). In conclusion, we find that the payments the attorney- tenants paid to AGI were principally for the use of the extraordinary personal services, and that the property leasing was incidental to the services AGI offered. Having also determined that petitioners materially participated in the leasing activity, we find that AGI’s activities are not passive activities. AGI’s losses therefore are nonpassive and may be netted with AGI’s other income. In reaching our holding, we have considered all arguments made, and, to the extent not mentioned, we conclude that they are moot, irrelevant, or without merit. To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered for petitioners.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Last modified: May 25, 2011