Michael Paul Remler and Pauline M. Velez - Page 5

                                        - 5 -                                         
          teachers at an agreed-upon hourly wage.  Beginning in November              
          2000, petitioners received direct reimbursement from BUSD, as               
          described above.  GJR’s education expenses exceeded funding for             
          both years in issue, and petitioners paid out-of-pocket for the             
          remainder.                                                                  
               GJR was the only student in petitioners’ afterschool program           
          and microschool.  Petitioners did not advertise or otherwise seek           
          additional students.  Petitioners did not apply for or receive              
          any grants during the years in issue.  Petitioners did not                  
          maintain a separate bank account for, or have any separate                  
          business assets dedicated to, the afterschool program or the                
          microschool.                                                                
               Petitioners timely filed joint Federal income tax returns              
          for the years in issue.  Attached to each return was a Schedule             
          C, Profit or Loss From Business, for petitioners’ “special                  
          education” activity.  Petitioners deducted Schedule C losses with           
          respect to the special education activity of $24,417 and $12,351,           
          and reported adjusted gross income of $229,665 and $229,219 for             
          1999 and 2000, respectively.                                                
               On November 6, 2003, respondent sent petitioners a notice of           
          deficiency for the years in issue.  Respondent determined that              
          petitioners’ special education activity was not a bona fide                 
          business activity entered into for profit and disallowed the                
          claimed deductions.  Respondent also determined that petitioners            






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011