John S. and Christobel D. Rendall - Page 21

                                       - 21 -                                         
          amended return claims a business bad debt deduction (ordinary               
          loss) for the worthlessness of the $2 million loan.12                       
               The third amended return adds a claim for a worthless stock            
          loss attributable to the worthlessness of Mr. Rendall’s Solv-Ex             
          common stock remaining after Merrill Lynch’s sale of the pledged            
          shares.  That deduction results in a pro tanto decrease in the              
          capital gain and increase in the net loss reported on the first             
          and second amended returns.                                                 
               On the Schedule D attached to the fourth amended return,               
          petitioners omit the gain from Merrill Lynch’s sale of the                  
          pledged Solv-Ex common stock.  Instead, they claim a worthless              
          stock loss equal to Mr. Rendall’s total cost basis in all of his            
          Solv-Ex shares, including the shares pledged to Merrill Lynch.              
          In the “Explanation of Changes to Income, Deductions, and                   
          Credits”, petitioners describe the purpose of the fourth amended            
          return as follows:  “To writeoff Solv-Ex worthless stock and                
          remove sales proceeds [from Merrill Lynch’s sale of the pledged             
          shares] which taxpayer incorrectly reported.”  That change                  
          results in a net capital loss for 1997 (deducted to the extent of           
          $3,000 pursuant to section 1211(b)) and a substantial increase in           


               12  The first and second amended returns report the same               
          1997 net loss.  Nonetheless, assuming there was a 1997 bad debt,            
          the business versus nonbusiness bad debt issue is not moot                  
          because the resolution of that issue directly bears upon the                
          amount of petitioners’ net operating loss carryback/carryover               
          from 1997.                                                                  





Page:  Previous  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011