- 40 -
activity exceeds the sum of the taxable losses incurred in the
activity. We disagree. With the possible exception of evidence
establishing that Bogaz was bred by petitioner and then sold by
her 10 years later for $20,000, petitioner has presented no
credible evidence that any of the assets used in the horse
activity (or for that matter any property that she owns) has
appreciated in value.24 Nor does the record contain any credible
evidence as to the specific fair market value of any of her
assets (but for Bogaz). While petitioner asks the Court to find
that the fair market values of Borissa, Feyras Raehele, Kart
Blanche, and the Falling Water Way property are the amounts which
the parties stipulated that the fair market values of those
assets were “not more than”, we decline to do so.25 The fact
that the value of an asset is “not more than” a stipulated amount
does not mean that it is equal to that amount or, for that
matter, that it is even close to that amount.
Petitioner focuses especially on the Gavilan Hills property
and states that this property supports her claim of a profit
24 In fact, petitioner’s reporting that she received no
consideration on her sale of Silent Reign would indicate that
Silent Reign had lost all of its $3,500 value during the time
that she owned it.
25 We also decline petitioner’s invitation to consider the
values reported on her depreciation schedules as the fair market
values of those depreciable assets at any time and decline to
presume that the fair market value of VT Kartel, had it not died,
would have as of the time of her trial been greater than her
proffered $35,000 fair market value of Kart Blanche.
Page: Previous 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011