Sue Taylor - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                         
          Ricke6 had a 95-percent and 5-percent membership interest in                
          Miroyal, respectively.  The Form 1065, Schedules K-1 for both               
          petitioner and Gerald Ricke reflected a distributive share of               
          zero dollars for 2000.                                                      
               B.   National Land Bank LLC                                            
                    1.     Taxable Year 1999                                          
               National Land Bank filed its Form 1065 for 1999 on October             
          19, 2000, with attached Schedules K-1 showing petitioner and                
          Speck Trust (Speck) each with a 50-percent membership interest.             
          In 1999, National Land Bank reported $110,544 in gross receipts             
          and sales and claimed “other deductions” totaling $100,236 for a            
          claimed $10,308 loss.  Revenue Agent Wayne Johnson (Mr. Johnson)            
          testified that petitioner made a mathematical error on National             
          Land Bank’s Form 1065 for 1999.  The $10,308 loss should have               
          been reflected as $10,308 of income.7                                       
               On June 25, 2001, petitioner filed an amended Form 1065 for            
          National Land Bank’s 1999 taxable year showing zero dollars in              
          taxable income and changing the membership interest:  Petitioner            
          25 percent and Speck International Trust 75 percent.8  Attached             

               6 The Court (noting that the letters “e” and “s” are                   
          diagonally adjacent on a standard typewriter keyboard) assumes              
          that Gerald Ricks and Gerald Ricke are the same person.  In any             
          event, it is not material to this opinion.                                  
               7 See supra note 2.                                                    
               8 The Court assumes Speck Trust and Speck International                
                                                             (continued...)           





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