Sheehy v. Commissioner
This text of 1996 T.C. Memo. 334 (Sheehy 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.
Opinion
*350 Decision will be entered under Rule 155.
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
JACOBS,
The issues for decision are (1) whether petitioners are entitled to deduct as research and development expenses $ 165,000 that Patrick F. Sheehy paid in 1991 to acquire interests in thoroughbred racehorses, 1 and (2) whether petitioners are liable for the
All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code for the year in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. Some of the facts have been stipulated and*351 are found accordingly. The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference.
FINDINGS OF FACT
At the time they filed their petition, petitioners Patrick F. and Arlene Gwon Sheehy, husband and wife, resided in Newport Beach, California. They timely filed their 1991 Federal income tax return.
Patrick F. Sheehy (petitioner) is a medical doctor who specializes in oncology and hematology. He is also engaged in the business of developing champion racehorses. Mrs. Sheehy is a research ophthalmologist.
During the year in issue, Super Horse, Inc. (Super Horse) purchased thoroughbred racehorses and sold interests in these horses to investors. Super Horse assisted individuals in identifying horses that could potentially become champion racehorses from their bloodlines. At all relevant times, John E. Judge was Super Horse's sole shareholder. Mr. Judge was also petitioners' accountant.
In 1991, petitioner paid Super Horse $ 165,000 to acquire interests in five thoroughbred racehorses, as follows:
| Date of Purchase | Horse | Interest | Price |
| 1/17/91 | U Gotta Bargain | 50% | $ 10,500 |
| 5/18/91 | Dr. Bounty | 50 | 13,000 |
| 5/18/91 | Gypsy Pirate | 66.6 | 14,000 |
| 8/25/91 | All the Days | 50 | 7,500 |
| 11/1/91 | Orchesis | 100 | 120,000 |
| Total | 165,000 |
*352 Petitioner acquired his interests in these horses, believing that the horses could become champions based on their bloodlines. Super Horse trained these racehorses for petitioner.
On a Schedule C attached to their 1991 Federal income tax return, petitioners deducted $ 165,000 as research and development expenses. 2 This deduction relates to the amount petitioner paid Super Horse to acquire his racehorse interests. Petitioners took the deduction on the advice of Mr. Judge. They did not claim a depreciation deduction for the racehorses.
In the notice of deficiency, respondent disallowed petitioners' $ 165,000 deduction for research and development expenses based on the determination that expenses for purchasing racehorses are not deductible under
OPINION
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1996 T.C. Memo. 334, 72 T.C.M. 178, 1996 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 350, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sheehy-v-commissioner-tax-1996.