Printer Friendly

Losses trust deducted were not from passive activity.

IRC section 469(a)(1) defines a passive activity as one involving the conduct of any trade or business in which the taxpayer does not materially participate. In section 469(a)(2), the statute describes a taxpayer as any

* Individual, estate or trust.

* Closely held C corporation.

* Personal service corporation.

In general, the IRS will treat a taxpayer as materially participating in an activity only if that taxpayer is involved in the operations on a regular, continuous and substantial basis.

The Mattie K. Carter Trust was established in 1956 under the will of Mattie K. Carter. Benjamin Fortson, the trustee since 1984, manages its assets, including the Carter Ranch, which the trust has operated since i956. The ranch covers some 15,000 acres and includes cattle-ranching as well as oil and gas interests. At the times in question the Carter Trust employed a full-time ranch manager and other employees who performed essentially all the ranch's activities. Fortson also devoted a substantial amount of time and attention to ranch activities.

The Carter Trust claimed deductions for losses it incurred in connection with the ranch operations for 1994 and 1995 of $856,518 and $796,687, respectively. In April 1999 the lRS issued a deficiency notice disallowing the deductions because of section 469's passive activity rules. The Carter Trust paid the disputed tax in full plus interest and made a timely refund claim, which the IRS denied. The trust then sued for a refund in district court.

The court considered the question of whether the Carter Trust materially participated in the cattle-ranch operations or was otherwise "passively" in volved. The IRS argued a trust's "material participation" in a trade or business, within the meaning of section 469(h), should be determined by evaluating only the trustee's activities. The IRS proposed to disallow the losses in full for both tax years because the trustee, Fortson, failed to meet the IRC's material participation requirements. The IRS classified the losses as "passive activity losses"

The Carter Trust said it--not the trustee--was the taxpayer, and material participation should be determined by assessing the trust's activities through its fiduciaries, employees and agents. The trust also said that as a legal entity, it could participate only through the actions of those individuals. Their collective efforts on the cattle-ranching operations during 1994 and 1995 were regular, continuous and substantial.

Result. For the taxpayer. The court found the IRS's contention that the trust's participation in the ranch operations should be measured by referring to the trustee's activities had no support within the plain meaning of the statute. The court said this position was arbitrary and subverted common sense and, in the absence of case law or regulations, the IRS should not create ambiguity where there was none.

The court held it undisputed that the Carter Trust, not its trustee, was the taxpayer. The trust's participation in the ranch operations entailed an assessment of the activities of those who labored on the ranch, or otherwise conducted ranch business on the trust's behalf. Their collective activities during the times in question were regular, continuous and substantial enough to constitute material participation.

The court concluded the losses the Carter Trust had sustained were not passive within the meaning of section 469. The IRS had improperly disallowed the ranching losses as passive activity losses, and the trust was entitled to a refund or the overpaid taxes with interest.

* Mattie K. Carter Trust v. United States, 256 F Supp 2d 536 (Tex. 2003).

Prepared by Claire Y. Nash, CPA, PhD, associate professor of accounting, Christian Brothers University, Memphis, Tennessee, and Tina Quinn, CPA, PhD, associate professor of accountancy, Arkansas State University, Jonesboro.
COPYRIGHT 2003 American Institute of CPA's
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2003, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Nash, Claire Y.
Publication:Journal of Accountancy
Date:Nov 1, 2003
Words:607
Previous Article:In its first private letter ruling on a medical reimbursement program, the IRS responded to a taxpayer's request for guidance on a reimbursement plan...
Next Article:Court says unallocated support payments are alimony.
Topics:


Related Articles
Passive loss included in NOL may be carried back.
PAL rules: definition of activity.
Release of capital and passive losses in dispositions of passive activities.
Use of management company prevents taxpayer from claiming active participation in rental property.
Avoiding the pitfalls associated with attempts to recharacterize activities.
Aggregating your rental activity? Be sure to tell the IRS.
Trust's material participation not limited to trustee's activity.
Defining "real estate professional" for PAL purposes.
Determining deductibility of passive losses.
Equipment leasing losses were not passive.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters