Ali and Arlene Mohammadpour - Page 8

                                        - 7 -                                         
               Also in contrast to the taxpayer in Commissioner v.                    
          Groetzinger, supra, petitioners did not keep reliable records of            
          Mr. Mohammadpour’s gambling activity.  This was due in part to              
          error,7 and also to the fact that Mr. Mohammadpour intentionally            
          ignored, for record-keeping purposes, bets on which he won less             
          than $600 and which therefore were not reported to the IRS by               
          means of Form W-2G.  These winning bets of less than $600 made up           
          approximately 10 percent of all Mr. Mohammadpour’s bets.  In                
          other words, petitioners adopted record-keeping practices which             
          would merely approximate Mr. Mohammadpour’s gambling performance.           
          Such is inconsistent with a conclusion that Mr. Mohammadpour                
          engaged in his gambling activity with the primary purpose of                
          making a profit.  As we found in Calvao v. Commissioner, supra:             
          “[P]etitioner’s efforts * * * are consistent with the desire to             
          win money * * *.  However, we find petitioner’s desire to win               
          money and his strategy for doing so is also consistent with                 
          gambling purely for its entertainment or recreational aspects.”             
               On the record before us, we are unable to conclude that Mr.            
          Mohammadpour’s gambling activity was a trade or business.  Even             

          “Attorney/Handicapper” and “Attorney/Greyhound Racing Wagerer”,             
          reported $20,373 of net income from his gambling activity and               
          $20,550 from his business as an attorney.                                   
               7Mr. Mohammadpour testified that in preparing petitioners’             
          2003 return he overlooked some records of winnings and “we did              
          not account for the recent amounts of perhaps no more than                  
          $10,000 maximum.”                                                           

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007