- 4 -
compute their long-term capital gain therefrom by using a last-
in-first-out (LIFO) method for computing cost basis, as they
allege, or by using a first-in-first-out (FIFO) method for
computing cost basis, as respondent alleges (the LIFO/FIFO basis
issue); (3) a $2 million nonbusiness bad debt deduction in 1997
as the result of the worthlessness in that year of a $2 million
debt from Solv-Ex to Mr. Rendall; (4) alternatively, a $2 million
business bad debt deduction as a result of that alleged
worthlessness; and (5) a worthless stock loss deduction for the
worthlessness, in 1997, of either Mr. Rendall’s remaining common
stock in Solv-Ex after the sale of 634,100 shares or (assuming
the sale of those shares is held not to be taxable to
petitioners) his common stock interest in Solv-Ex, including
those 634,100 shares.
Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to
the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year at issue, 1997,
and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice
and Procedure.
FINDINGS OF FACT3
Some facts are stipulated and are so found. The stipulation
3 To the extent that petitioners or respondent fail to set
forth objections to the other’s proposed findings of fact, we
conclude that those proposed findings of fact are correct except
to the extent that the nonobjecting party’s proposed findings of
fact are clearly inconsistent therewith. See Jonson v.
Commissioner, 118 T.C. 106, 108 n.4 (2002), affd. 353 F.3d 1181
(10th Cir. 2003).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011