Lillie M. Tripp - Page 3




                                       - 2 -                                          
        and this opinion shall not be treated as precedent for any other              
        case.                                                                         
             Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioner’s Federal               
        income tax of $7,799, $10,001, and $3,290 for 2002, 2003, and                 
        2004, respectively.  In addition, respondent determined that                  
        petitioner was liable for accuracy-related penalties under section            
        6662 of $1,559.80 for 2002, $2,000.20 for 2003, and $658 for 2004.            
        The deficiencies arose as a consequence of respondent’s                       
        disallowance of deductions petitioner claimed for losses in                   
        connection with her partnership interest in the LB Tripp & Tripp              
        Group (the Tripp partnership).  Embedded in the 2003 loss was a               
        $24,052 salary expense deduction for the value of cash and                    
        equipment transferred to a third party in exchange for services               
        rendered to the partnership.                                                  
             Respondent also determined a deficiency in the 2003 income               
        tax of petitioner’s former husband, Richard Powell Tripp (Mr.                 
        Tripp), stemming from the disallowance of a deduction claimed for             
        a loss with respect to his interest in the Tripp partnership.2  Mr.           
        Tripp timely petitioned this Court, and his case at docket No.                
        5256-06S was consolidated with the instant case for trial.  After             




               2The disallowed deduction for a loss in Mr. Tripp’s case was           
          in part attributable to the same $24,052 deduction for a salary             
          expense as in petitioner’s case.                                            







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007