1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*192 Decisions will be entered for respondent.
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
PARR,
Additions to Tax | |||||
Sec. | Sec. | Sec. | Sec. | ||
Year | Deficiency | 6651(a)(1) | 6653(a)(1)(A) | 6653(a)(1)(B) | 6661(a) |
1986 | $ 5,616 | $ 1,404.03 | $ 365.95 | 1 | $ 1,404 |
1987 | 13,268 | 2,653.69 | 1,005.80 | 2,339 | |
Penalty | ||
Sec. | ||
Year | Deficiency | 6662(a) |
1989 | $ 4,869 | -- |
1990 | 8,568 | $ 1,714 |
After concessions by petitioner, the issues for decision in these consolidated cases are: (1) Whether petitioner has sufficient basis in Mirage Entertainment, Inc., an S corporation, to deduct a $ 22,939 loss in 1989, and a $ 27,096 loss in 1990. We hold that his basis in Mirage1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*193 Entertainment, Inc., is $ 1,000; thus, petitioner can deduct only $ 1,000 of the loss attributable to an S corporation in 1989, and none of the 1990 loss. (2) Whether petitioner substantiated a 1983 capital loss carryover attributable to investments in the commodities markets that could be deducted against 1986 capital gains. We hold that he did not substantiate such a loss carryover. (3) Whether petitioner is liable for additions to tax under
1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*194 FINDINGS OF FACT
Throughout the time the petitions herein were filed, petitioner resided in Texas. Petitioner has a high school education.
In 1983, petitioner was involved in commodities dealings in regard to copper futures. Because the broker he dealt with was bought out by another brokerage company, and the second company then went bankrupt, none of petitioner's records are currently available from either of the brokerage companies. Petitioner had partial records to show that he purchased at least $ 1,625 in copper futures in January 1983; and to show that he had a beginning ledger balance of $ 20,045.8 (the final figure is illegible), on his February, 1, 1983, brokerage statement. Petitioner also submitted an affidavit from his former broker to show that he had no funds in his brokerage account as of March 31, 1983.
Mirage Real Estate, Inc., was incorporated as a C corporation in 1984, when it issued 100 percent of its capital stock to petitioner in exchange for $ 1,000. Petitioner continues to be the sole shareholder and sole officer of the corporation. Petitioner elected for Mirage Real Estate, Inc., to be treated as an S corporation beginning January 1, 1990.
Mirage1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*195 Entertainment, Inc., was incorporated as a C corporation in 1985, when it issued 100 percent of its capital stock to petitioner in exchange for $ 1,000. Petitioner continues to be the sole shareholder and sole officer of the corporation. Petitioner elected for Mirage Entertainment, Inc., to be treated as an S corporation beginning January 1, 1989. The balance in the retained earnings account, as well as the accumulated adjustments account of Mirage Entertainment, Inc., was negative at the end of both 1989 and 1990.
The two S corporations each operate a bar at separate locations. The reason petitioner chose to form two separate corporations was to limit his liability in case of a liquor-related accident. At the end of 1986 and 1987, Mirage Entertainment, Inc., owed Mirage Real Estate, Inc., accounts payable of $ 10,012 and $ 22,309.69, respectively. The entities did not formalize this debt with notes.
Petitioner filed an extension request to extend the due date for filing his 1986 Federal income tax return until October 15, 1987; he filed the return on November 3, 1988. Petitioner filed an extension request to extend the due date for filing his 1987 Federal income tax return1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*196 until August 15, 1988; he filed the return on November 21, 1988.
OPINION
Respondent determined that petitioner's basis in the S corporation, Mirage Entertainment, Inc., was $ 1,000. For this reason, respondent determined that petitioner's 1989 loss regarding Mirage Entertainment, Inc., is limited to $ 1,000 and petitioner is allowed no loss for 1990.
Petitioner asserts that although he only invested $ 1,000 in the stock of Mirage Entertainment, Inc., he loaned additional funds to the corporation, through another wholly owned corporation, Mirage Real Estate, Inc. Since he was the sole shareholder of both corporations, petitioner asserts the loans from one to the other should be attributed to him, and he should be allowed to deduct the loss.
Subchapter S income, losses, and deductions are passed through pro rata to the shareholder. The total amount of pass-through losses and deductions is limited to the sum of the shareholder's adjusted basis in his stock and any indebtedness owed by the corporation to the
Here, petitioner did not loan money to Mirage Entertainment, Inc., and his only investment in the corporation was the $ 1,000 he originally paid for the stock. Petitioner's other wholly owned corporation, Mirage Real Estate, Inc., did loan money to Mirage Entertainment, Inc.; however, that loan does not increase petitioner's basis1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*198 in Mirage Entertainment, Inc.
Petitioner would have us ignore the corporate form in which he has chosen to do business. However, we have consistently held that taxpayers are generally constrained to be taxed in the same form in which they have chosen to operate.
While the result may seem harsh to petitioner, we cannot ignore the plain language of the statute and, in effect, rewrite the statute to achieve what would be an equitable result.
For the above reasons, we hold that petitioner's basis in Mirage Entertainment, Inc., is $ 1,000; thus, petitioner's deductible loss for 1989, is limited to1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*199 $ 1,000, and he is unable to deduct a loss in 1990.
Respondent determined that petitioner did not substantiate his 1983 capital loss and thus is unable to deduct the carryover of that loss against his 1986 capital gain income. Petitioner asks us to accept his testimony regarding his basis and the activity in his commodities account.
A taxpayer is required to keep records to establish the deductions to which he or she is entitled.
Petitioner did not show: That he incurred a loss; when the loss was incurred; that he was1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*200 eligible to deduct the loss; whether the loss was capital or noncapital, business or personal; and finally, petitioner did not show the amount of capital gain during the intervening years so that allowable carryforward, if any, could be calculated. Petitioner asserted that he had a $ 20,000 loss on transactions regarding copper futures. The brokerage statements he provided did not substantiate that he had such a loss. Additionally, petitioner did not challenge respondent's assertion that copper futures did not fall fast enough from January 1, 1983, to March 31, 1983, to substantiate a $ 20,000 loss during that period. Even though petitioner had evidence of a $ -0- balance in his investment account at March 31, 1983, such a balance could also indicate that he had simply withdrawn his money from the brokerage account.
Since petitioner has the burden of proof in this matter,
Respondent determined that petitioner is1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*201 liable for additions to tax for failure to timely file his 1986 and 1987 Federal income tax returns under
In her notices of deficiency, respondent determined that petitioner is liable for additions to tax for negligence under
For 1986 and 1987,
For 1990,
Negligence under
In the instant cases, petitioner failed to produce adequate records, both overstated and understated deductions, and omitted substantial amounts of taxable income from his tax return. Additionally, petitioner paid many of his personal expenses through his business bank account. Petitioner's chosen bookkeeping method is subject to a high degree of error, and petitioner did not take adequate precautions to insure that his books and records were accurate and complete. Based on this record, 1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*204 petitioner has failed to demonstrate that he was not negligent. Accordingly, we sustain respondent's determination that petitioner is liable for the additions to tax for negligence pursuant to
Respondent determined that petitioner is liable for additions to tax due to substantial understatement of tax for 1986 and 1987, pursuant to
1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*205
A substantial understatement of income tax exists in a year if the tax understatement exceeds the greater of $ 5,000 or 10 percent of the amount required to be shown on the return.
In the cases at hand, petitioner failed to present any substantial authority for his positions. He did not adequately disclose any facts pertaining to the understated gross income or overstated deductions on any of the tax returns as filed, or on any statements attached to such returns. 1995 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 192">*206 Therefore, we hold that petitioner is liable for the
To reflect the foregoing,
1. Petitioner engaged Robert B. Wallace, Jr., 8 months following the trial, to assist in belated efforts to submit evidence in these cases.↩
1. 50 percent of the interest due on $ 5,616 and $ 9,357, for 1986 and 1987, respectively.↩
2. All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the taxable years in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, unless otherwise indicated.↩
3. For additions assessed after Oct. 1986, even though the understatement was for a year prior to that date, the rate is 25 percent. See