Cole v. Commissioner

1977 T.C. Memo. 250, 36 T.C.M. 1014, 1977 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 195
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedJuly 28, 1977
DocketDocket No. 7687-74.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1977 T.C. Memo. 250 (Cole v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cole v. Commissioner, 1977 T.C. Memo. 250, 36 T.C.M. 1014, 1977 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 195 (tax 1977).

Opinion

LYNN D. COLE, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Cole v. Commissioner
Docket No. 7687-74.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1977-250; 1977 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 195; 36 T.C.M. (CCH) 1014; T.C.M. (RIA) 770250;
July 28, 1977, Filed
Lynn D. Cole, pro se.
Willard N. Timm, for the respondent.

QUEALY

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

QUEALY, Judge: Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioner's Federal income taxes for the taxable years 1969 and 1970 in the amounts of $30,805.49 and $3,301.27, respectively.

The issues remaining for decision are as follows:

(1) Whether petitioner and Dr. Cole can deduct $1,400 as depreciation on certain improvements*196 to their personal residence as property used in a trade or business under section 167. 1

(2) Whether petitioner correctly computed their basis in 3,000 shares of stock sold in February 1969, under section 1012.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts have been stipulated.

The stipulation of facts and the exhibits attached thereto are incorporated herein by this reference.

At the time of the filing of the petition herein, petitioner resided in Santa Anna, California. Dr. Leland G. Cole and Mrs. Lynn D. Cole filed joint Federal income tax returns for the years 1969 and 1970. During the course of the audit by respondent of Dr. Cole and petitioner's return, Dr. Cole filed a petition with the United States Bankruptcy Court under Chapter XI of the Bankruptcy Act. Respondent made an immediate assessment of the proposed deficiency against Dr. Cole as required by section 6871(a) and filed a proof of claim in the bankruptcy proceeding. However, petitioner did not file a petition under the Bankruptcy Act with the Bankruptcy Court; therefore, the audit of petitioner was continued. *197 Dr. Cole is currently under the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court and is therefore not a party to this case.

During the years in issue Dr. Cole was self-employed as a consultant and promoter. When petitioner and Dr. Cole purchased a home in Huntington Harbor, California, Dr. Cole observed that their home and others in the development were underbuilt in relation to the cost of each individual lot. With this in mind, Dr. Cole contracted with a custom builder, with whom he had discussed a joint business venture of selling similar home improvements to neighbors, to construct improvements on his property. The improvements to their home included an overhanging deck in front of the house, a sophisticated security system, an air conditioning system, lighting and audio stero equipment and an elevator for the trash barrels. The cost of the alterations and improvements was $42,000.

Dr. Cole and the builder did not enter into a business relationship. However, in an effort to interest others in the development to make similar improvements, Dr. Cole allowed the public to inspect his home. He advised any interested individual to contact the builder directly regarding the construction*198 of the improvements. Dr. Cole did not advertise publicly. The only advertising was by word of mouth. Five sales were made in the neighborhood by the contractor. Dr. Cole never received any compensation for any of the sales. Dr. Cole had been advised by his attorneys to delay entering into a formal business relationship with the builder until the builder was in a stronger financial position. Personal difficulties between petitioner and Dr. Cole in 1972 delayed indefinitely any additional activity in exploiting the residence for business purposes.

Petitioner and Dr. Cole depreciated the $42,000 over 10 years, allocating one-third of the improvements to business use, or $1,400 per year. The $1,400 yearly depreciation was included within the $3,870.95 and the $3,598.48 business use of home deduction for the year 1969 and 1970, respectively. Respondent determined that petitioner was not using his home for his business and disallowed most of the deduction. The parties have since reached an agreement on all but the $1,400 depreciation deduction.

In February 1962, while employed as a research scientist with Telecomputing Corporation, subsequently known as Whittaker Corporation, *199 Dr. Cole entered into a "Restricted Stock Option Agreement" with the corporation. The agreement granted Dr. Cole an option to purchase 7,500 shares of the common stock of Whittaker Corporation at $5.94 per share. The agreement was modified by an "Amendment of Restricted Stock Option Agreement" entered into on May 28, 1963. Under the terms of the amendment, the purchase price of 7,500 shares of Whittaker stock was reduced from $5.94 per share to $4.50, and Dr. Cole was allowed to purchase an additional 5,000 shares.

On March 1, 1963, Dr. Cole purchased 200 shares of the common stock in Whittaker Corporation. On May 1, 1963, he purchased another 100 shares. Sometime prior to March 31, 1967, Dr. Cole turned over the 300 shares evidenced by three certificates to the stock brokerage firm of Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards, to be held in their account.

On February 10, 1967, Dr. Cole purchased 7,500 shares of common stock of Whittaker Corporation. On March 3, 1967, Dr. Cole purchased another 1,000 shares of Whittaker stock resulting in his owning a total of 8,800 shares of Whittaker Corporation stock. Dr. Cole pledged the remaining 8,500 shares of stock to Security National Bank*200 (now Security Pacific National Bank) as security for a loan pursuant to an agreement dated February 8, 1967. The 8,500 shares of stock remained at all times from 1967 up to March 17, 1969, in the physical possession of the bank.

In December 1967, Dr. Cole directed his stockbroker at Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards to sell 1,200 shares of Whittaker Corporation stock and then repurchase 1,200 shares. The broker completed the transaction. However, no delivery was made at the time with any of the 8,500 shares of Whittaker stock being held by Security Pacific National Bank to the broker and Dr.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Owen v. Commissioner
23 T.C. 377 (U.S. Tax Court, 1954)
Industrial Research Products, Inc. v. Commissioner
40 T.C. 578 (U.S. Tax Court, 1963)
Corbett v. Commissioner
55 T.C. 884 (U.S. Tax Court, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1977 T.C. Memo. 250, 36 T.C.M. 1014, 1977 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 195, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cole-v-commissioner-tax-1977.