John Charles Geyer & Christin Teresa Wildfeuer v. Commissioner

2013 T.C. Summary Opinion 90
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedNovember 14, 2013
Docket21974-11S
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2013 T.C. Summary Opinion 90 (John Charles Geyer & Christin Teresa Wildfeuer 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
John Charles Geyer & Christin Teresa Wildfeuer v. Commissioner, 2013 T.C. Summary Opinion 90 (tax 2013).

Opinion

PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b),THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE. T.C. Summary Opinion 2013-90

UNITED STATES TAX COURT

JOHN CHARLES GEYER AND CHRISTIN TERESA WILDFEUER, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent

Docket No. 21974-11S. Filed November 14, 2013.

Derek W. Kaczmarek and Kacie Dillon, for petitioners.

Kimberly Hayden, for respondent.

SUMMARY OPINION

LARO, Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of section

7463 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect when the petition was filed. Pursuant

to section 7463(b), the decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other

court, and this opinion shall not be treated as precedent for any other case. -2-

In a notice of deficiency, respondent determined a deficiency of $3,915 in

petitioners’ Federal income tax for 2008. Petitioners resided in Arizona when they

filed their petition. The only issue for us to decide is whether petitioners’ travel

guide and video sales activities were “activit[ies] not engaged in for profit” under

section 183.1 We hold that petitioners did not engage in those activities for profit.

Background

Petitioners are avid travelers. Before 1997 petitioners traveled in their first

recreational vehicle (RV) throughout America and Mexico for personal pleasure

on an average of three months every year. All in all, petitioners traveled over

100,000 miles on these trips. In 1997 petitioners purchased a second RV, also for

personal pleasure, which they used to continue their yearly trips throughout

America and Mexico. Currently, petitioners travel around two months per year in

their RV.

While traveling in Mexico in 1999 petitioners learned about Adventure

Caravans, an RV tour company. For each trip, Adventure Caravans contracts with

independent contractors to serve as the wagon master or the tailgunner. The

wagon master has primary responsibility for running the trip. Responsibilities

1 Unless otherwise indicated, section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year at issue, and Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. -3-

include interfacing with customers, holding introductory meetings, and making

arrangements for RV parks, meals, attractions, and tour guides. The tailgunner is

an assistant who follows the RVs and helps resolve any problems that arise.

Wagon masters are paid twice as much as tailgunners. To be eligible to be a

wagon master for a particular trip, an individual must have served as the tailgunner

for that same trip on a prior occasion. Finally, wagon masters, tailgunners, and

customers travel in their own RVs.

For each trip, Adventure Caravans gives the wagon master a budget.

Wagon masters are strongly advised to stay within this budget and must personally

pay for unjustified cost overruns. Adventure Caravans pays wagon masters half of

their contract price before the trip and the other half when the trip is complete. In

addition, wagon masters and tailgunners receive tips from customers. Adventure

Caravans sells the trips to customers and mandates certain attractions and social

gatherings for each trip. In addition, Adventure Caravans provides wagon masters

and tailgunners with the materials they need, including log books, finance books,

and field staff manuals. Beyond that, wagon masters are free to plan additional

attractions and social gatherings.

Adventure Caravans assigns trips to wagon masters and tailgunners on the

basis of their preferences, customer evaluations from past trips, and their ability to -4-

stay within budget. Every year, wagon masters and tailgunners complete a tour

preference form in which they indicate their interest in and preferences for trips

scheduled one or two years in advance.

After learning of Adventure Caravans, petitioners submitted an application,

went to training classes, and were assigned to a trip. Adventure Caravans’ training

classes covered topics such as bookkeeping, couples counseling, foreign

languages, marketing, and changing tires. In addition to attending Adventure

Caravans’ classes, throughout the years Mr. Geyer attended seminars and

conventions on caravanning and mechanical work.

Travel guide activity

Petitioners went on their first trip with Adventure Caravans in 2000. For

each year thereafter, petitioners led tours for Adventure Caravans, until their last

trip in 2008. Petitioners testified that they stopped touring with Adventure

Caravans after 2008 because it was not profitable and because Adventure

Caravans did not offer them any more trips to lead. In their Schedules C, Profit or

Loss From Business, for their travel guide activity for 2003 to 2009, petitioners

reported their income and expenses as follows: -5-

Year Gross income Total expenses Net profit or (loss)

2003 $8,158 $8,573 ($415) 2004 -0- 414 (414) 2005 4,071 8,327 (4,256) 2006 7,390 6,775 615 2007 6,166 7,772 (1,606) 2008 11,382 27,637 (16,255) 2009 500 3,787 (3,287)

Petitioners kept two sets of books for their travel guide activity. In one set

of books, petitioners kept track of money advanced by Adventure Caravans to pay

for tour expenses such as RV parks, customer meals, and tour guides. In the other

set of books, petitioners kept track of expenses that were not covered by

Adventure Caravans. Petitioners also maintained a mileage log. In addition,

petitioners sought and followed general business advice from their accountant, Mr.

Pliska, including, specifically, the handling of expenses. However, petitioners did

not have a business bank account for their travel guide activity, nor did they

operate through a business name.

Although Adventure Caravans provides wagon masters with planning

materials for each trip, petitioners found the materials inadequate and began

keeping travel notes, which they referred to as their encyclopedia. In the

encyclopedia, petitioners kept notes about each trip, including where to go, what

activities to do, how long activities take, who to contact, what customers liked, -6-

etc. Petitioners testified that they used the encyclopedia to improve their

customers’ experiences so that they would receive higher tips and better customer

reviews.

Petitioners decided which trips to lead on the basis of their qualifications

and the trip’s profitability. Using these criteria, petitioners frequently led trips to

Mexico. According to petitioners, they were more qualified to lead trips to

Mexico because of their personal travels there. Petitioners further testified that

trips to Mexico were more profitable because Mexico was close to their home in

Arizona and because those trips lasted longer. Mrs. Wildfeuer further testified

that although she had always wanted to lead a trip to Alaska, she decided against it

because Alaska was too far away from them for such a trip to be profitable.

Video sales activity

In addition to guiding RV tours, petitioners also created videos of the trips,

which they sold as tour memorabilia. To learn about filmmaking, petitioners

attended seminars about creating successful videos and sought advice from Screen

Play, the company from which they purchased their video equipment. Petitioners

edited, narrated, and added music to the video footage of customers engaging in

tour activities.

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

Related

Welch v. Helvering
290 U.S. 111 (Supreme Court, 1933)
Hilliard v. Commissioner
1995 T.C. Memo. 473 (U.S. Tax Court, 1995)
Giles v. Comm'r
2005 T.C. Memo. 28 (U.S. Tax Court, 2005)
Lowe v. Comm'r
2010 T.C. Memo. 129 (U.S. Tax Court, 2010)
Strode v. Comm'r
2012 T.C. Memo. 59 (U.S. Tax Court, 2012)
Storey v. Comm'r
2012 T.C. Memo. 115 (U.S. Tax Court, 2012)
Wright v. Commissioner
31 T.C. 1264 (U.S. Tax Court, 1959)
Jackson v. Commissioner
59 T.C. 312 (U.S. Tax Court, 1972)
Allen v. Commissioner
72 T.C. 28 (U.S. Tax Court, 1979)
Golanty v. Commissioner
72 T.C. 411 (U.S. Tax Court, 1979)
McGowan v. Commissioner
1964 T.C. Memo. 241 (U.S. Tax Court, 1964)
Hellings v. Commissioner
1994 T.C. Memo. 24 (U.S. Tax Court, 1994)
Heppe v. Commissioner
1995 T.C. Memo. 314 (U.S. Tax Court, 1995)
Lesher v. Commissioner
1987 T.C. Memo. 345 (U.S. Tax Court, 1987)
Warden v. Commissioner
1995 T.C. Memo. 176 (U.S. Tax Court, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2013 T.C. Summary Opinion 90, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-charles-geyer-christin-teresa-wildfeuer-v-commissioner-tax-2013.