- 23 -
everything was for sale for the right price. Testimony also
indicates that Mr. Taylor rejected a suggestion to form a
foundation to own the classic cars. Mr. Taylor rejected the
suggestion when he learned that the profits from selling the
classic cars would go to the foundation rather than the
dealership. Mr. Taylor wanted the profits to flow to the
dealership. This factor favors petitioner.
7. Time Devoted to Sales Activity
That a taxpayer devotes little time or effort to the selling
of assets may suggest that the assets are held for investment
purposes. Williford v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-450. A
taxpayer does not hold property for sale if the taxpayer did not
initiate sales, advertise, have a sales office, or spend a great
deal of time on the transactions. Byram v. United States, 705
F.2d 1418, 1424 (5th Cir. 1983); see also Ross v. Commissioner,
227 F.2d 265 (5th Cir. 1955) (taxpayer did not list property with
real estate dealers, advertise, or make efforts to sell the
property), revg. T.C. Memo. 1954-179.
We find that the dealership here devoted substantial time to
the sales activity. This includes the time spent coordinating
advertising and promotional events, and the time Mr. Taylor spent
at classic car shows and auctions negotiating with potential
customers, as well as the time the broker spent negotiating sales
following Mr. Taylor’s death. This factor favors petitioner.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011