Lee v. Comm'r

2006 T.C. Memo. 70, 91 T.C.M. 999, 2006 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 72
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedApril 11, 2006
DocketNo. 21038-03
StatusUnpublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 2006 T.C. Memo. 70 (Lee v. Comm'r) 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
Lee v. Comm'r, 2006 T.C. Memo. 70, 91 T.C.M. 999, 2006 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 72 (tax 2006).

Opinion

MELVIN D. LEE, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Lee v. Comm'r
No. 21038-03
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 2006-70; 2006 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 72; 91 T.C.M. (CCH) 999; RIA TM 56476;
April 11, 2006, Filed
*72 Melvin D. Lee, pro se.
Michael E. Melone and Catherine G. Chang, for respondent.
Swift, Stephen J.

Stephen J. Swift

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

SWIFT, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner's Federal income tax for 1997, an addition to tax, and a penalty, as follows:

           Addition to Tax    Accuracy-Related Penalty

Deficiency      Under Sec. 6651(a)     Under Sec. 6662(a)__________      __________________   ________________________

$ 67,822          $ 16,956         $ 13,564

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

After settlement or concession of some issues, the two primary issues for decision are (1) whether petitioner has substantiated increased itemized deductions for State and local income taxes, a $ 25,990 net operating loss (NOL) carryforward from 1996, a $ 206,881 long-term capital loss carryforward from 1996, $ 35,289 in suspended passive activity losses in 1992 through 1996*73 relating to real estate which petitioner sold in 1997, and $ 40,466 in legal fees relating to an investment in a limited partnership, and (2) whether a nonbusiness loan made by petitioner to a friend became worthless in 1997.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.

At the time the petition was filed, petitioner resided in San Francisco, California.

Petitioner provides consulting services to developers and contractors seeking building permits. Petitioner has invested in various construction projects in the San Francisco Bay area.

Belmont Gardens

In approximately 1994 or 1995, petitioner and Ike Guillory (Guillory), a business associate, formed Belmont Gardens, L.P., as a limited partnership (BG Partnership). The BG Partnership agreement designated Guillory as the general partner and petitioner as the limited partner. Petitioner and Guillory formed the partnership in order to develop a 20-unit senior-living residential complex in Belmont, California (Belmont Gardens). I.P.G. Builders, Inc. (I.P.G. Builders), which Guillory owned, was to serve as the general contractor for construction of Belmont Gardens.

Construction of Belmont Gardens began prior*74 to 1997. At some point during construction, petitioner became dissatisfied with the work performed on Belmont Gardens by I.P.G. Builders. Construction was behind schedule, and the construction quality was substandard. Extensive water damage to many of the units occurred because of leaks in the roof.

Petitioner eventually took legal action against I.P.G. Builders and Guillory to remedy the construction defects and to assume control over construction of Belmont Gardens. On April 25, 1997, petitioner filed a complaint in State court against I.P.G. Builders and Guillory for breach of contract.

Peach Tree Property

Beginning in 1991, petitioner rented out real property he owned in Penryn, California (Peach Tree Property). In 1997 petitioner sold the Peach Tree Property for $ 235,000.

Dejanu Loan

In mid-1994, petitioner made two loans to a friend of his by the name of Peter Dejanu (Dejanu), which loans totaled $ 15,000. The loans were to be repaid by Dejanu with interest 30 days from the date each loan was made. Dejanu did not repay the loans. Petitioner attempted to obtain repayment of the loans from Dejanu on approximately a weekly or biweekly basis from the due date in 1994 until*75 some time in 1997.

In 1997, petitioner discovered that Dejanu was essentially insolvent and was seeking funds from other individuals. After discovery of Dejanu's desperate financial situation, and his unsuccessful collection efforts and the length of time his loans to Dejanu had been in default, petitioner concluded that the Dejanu loans were uncollectible, and petitioner ceased collection activities. Petitioner did not recover any principal or interest on the Dejanu loans.

Tax Return and Respondent's Audit

On June 20, 1999, petitioner untimely filed with respondent his 1997 individual Federal income tax return, on which petitioner claimed various deductions relating to State and local income taxes, an NOL carryover, a long-term capital loss carryover, suspended passive activity losses relating to the Peach Tree Property, legal fees relating to Belmont Gardens, and the worthlessness of the Dejanu loan.

On audit, respondent disallowed the claimed deductions primarily on the grounds of lack of substantiation, as set forth below:

                   Amount        Amount

                  Claimed*76 by      Allowed by

Nature of Deduction Claimed     Petitioner      Respondent

___________________________     __________      __________

State and local income taxes     $  17,385        $ 3,532

NOL carryforward from 1996       25,990           0

Long-term capital loss

 carryforward n.1            206,881           0

Suspended passive activity losses    35,289           0

Legal fees relating to Belmont

 Gardens                40,466           0

Worthless Dejanu loan n.2         15,000           0

n.1 From prior years, petitioner claimed a long-term

capital loss carry forward into 1997 of $ 206,881, of which $ 88,430

was used to offset in full a net long-term capital gain for 1997,

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

Related

Lakeview Hospice Care, Inc.
U.S. Tax Court, 2025
Short Stop Electric, Inc.
U.S. Tax Court, 2023
Lisa A. Bruno v. Commissioner
2020 T.C. Memo. 156 (U.S. Tax Court, 2020)
Randy McRae & Shelby McRae v. Commissioner
2019 T.C. Memo. 163 (U.S. Tax Court, 2019)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2006 T.C. Memo. 70, 91 T.C.M. 999, 2006 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 72, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-v-commr-tax-2006.