- 3 -
permit each of them to deduct his pro rata share of Sidal’s
ordinary losses, to the extent of $329,7972 for 1999 and $492,588
for 2000 (sometimes, the basis issue).3
The notices of deficiency contain certain other adjustments
that are purely computational. Their resolution solely depends
upon our resolution of the basis issue.
2 The parties stipulate that Sid Paul Ruckriegel’s (Sid’s)
1999 deduction for Sidal’s 1999 losses was $324,750, but Sid’s
1999 return confirms that he reported a 1999 loss of $329,797
from Sidal. That is also the amount of the Sidal loss respondent
disallowed in the notice of deficiency issued to Sid. Erroneous
stipulations are not binding on this Court. See Gulf Oil Corp.
v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 135, 159-160 n.4 (1986), affd. 914 F.2d
396 (3d Cir. 1990). Therefore, we find that Sid’s 1999 reported
loss from Sidal is $329,797.
3 In his notices of deficiency, respondent also made
adjustments, pursuant to sec. 267(a)(2), increasing each
petitioner’s “passthrough” income from Sidal by $12,407 for 1999
and $37,233 for 2000 attributable to Sidal’s disallowed
deductions for interest owed to a related party. Respondent
characterizes the adjustments, both on brief and in his notices
of deficiency, as increases in each petitioner’s interest income
from Sidal. Although petitioners assign error to those
adjustments in their petitions, they make no argument either in
their trial memoranda or on brief concerning the adjustments.
Consequently, we consider the adjustments to have been conceded
by petitioners. See Nicklaus v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 117, 120
n.4 (2001); Rybak v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 524, 566 n.19 (1988);
Zimmerman v. Commissioner, 67 T.C. 94, 104 n.7 (1976).
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