- 64 - reported through the taxable years in question does not reflect the potential to recoup the claimed losses as Zane contends. Accordingly, we find this factor to be unfavorable for Zane. 5. Taxpayer’s Success in Similar or Dissimilar Activities-- In addition to his dog breeding activity, Zane operated a cattle activity that had reported losses. On the other hand, Zane was vice president of Beneco–-a very successful business operated by Zane and his family. He did not show that the experience or success from Beneco was carried over into his dog breeding activity. For example, there were inadequate records of the activity. There was no showing that his acquired business techniques were used to cut costs or improve receipts. Accordingly, this factor is not favorable to Zane. 6. The Activity’s History of Income and/or Losses--By the end of 2001, Zane had accumulated losses in an amount approaching $275,000. By 2004, his losses were approaching $340,000. These losses were used to offset Zane and Shannon’s other substantial income. The amount of losses in comparison with revenues does not show, however, that Zane intended to cut losses or improve the potential for gain. Although Zane contends that the potential to recoup the losses and show gain existed, the record does not support his contention. Accordingly, this factor is unfavorable for Zane.Page: Previous 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 NextLast modified: March 27, 2008