Decnavda's Dialectic 
  corner   



HOME

ARCHIVES


A Left Libertarian Blog
Decnavda is a member of the California Bar. To contact Decnavda, click here.

What is a Left Libertarian?

Links
U.S. Tax Court
LawSites
Stuart Levine's TaxBiz
A Taxing Blog
Legal bitstream
Taxing Thoughts
Max Sawicky
Citizens for Tax Justice


< ? law blogs # >

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Site Meter

 

Tuesday, January 28, 2003

 


The decision in the case of Charlie Daniel Turner, Jr. and Sandra Lovell Turner turned on a fact-based analysis of whether or not Mr. Turner's activity of promoting and participating in open-road racing was a business or a hobby. In finding it to be hobby, Tax Court listed the none factors listed in the regs to be considered, and then declined to discuss them, simply attaching as an appendix to the opinion a magazine article about Mr. Turner's activity that Mr. Turner had submitted as evidence. Tax Court cites no case that allows them to punt like this and not actually discuss the factors that the regs claim must be considered. The fact that Mr. Turner considered this evidence to be in his favor indicates that Tax Court should at least discuss why it works against him, regardless of how obvious Tax Court considers this to be. Tax Court also listed several facts in the case summary that support its opinion, but did not bother to discuss those either. All-in-all a correct but sloppy opinion. Tax Court also allowed some late filing penalties to stand despite severe medical problems of both taxpayers, because the taxpayers eventually went back to work before filing their taxes. unduly harsh, in my opinion, but at least they bothered to cite cases supporting this judgement.



Comments: Post a Comment



This page is powered by Blogger.