- 7 - the $203,000 sale price for the South Dakota property between the residence and the workshop. Respondent urges us to apportion the sale proceeds of the South Dakota property by square footage; because the workshop was approximately 9 percent of the home’s overall square footage, respondent suggests that we should allocate 9 percent of the home’s sale price to the workshop. However, given that workshop space is not as valuable as living space in a home, we decline to use respondent’s calculation method. Petitioners, on the other hand, urge us to assign $4,000 of the sale price to the workshop. They arrive at this number by calculating the difference between the 1998 appraisal of $199,000 and the 2001 sale price of $203,000; in other words, petitioners attribute the entire increase in the home’s value between 1998 and 2001 to the workshop. They contend that all of the increase must have been a result of the workshop as that was the only thing that changed in the period between appraisals. We disagree with petitioners’ argument. Rather than use either of the parties’ methods to allocate the proceeds from the sale of the South Dakota property between the residence and the workshop, we shall use the only allocation approach supported by the record; i.e., taking the average of the appraisals of the workshop value used for the 2001 sale. This approach may be an imperfect solution given the fact that thePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NextLast modified: March 27, 2008