Howell v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Partnership loss claimed by petitioner held, on the facts, not to have been incurred in a business or transaction entered into for profit and hence not deductible under section 165, I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Opper, Judge:
It may ordinarily be reasonable to assume that businessmen do not undertake a commercial venture except for the purpose of making a profit. In such a situation, although they may exercise bad judgment so that the prospects of a profitable operation are negligible or even absent, that alone would be an inadequate criterion for determining the taxpayer’s purpose. Samuel Riker, Jr., Executor, 6 B.T.A. 890 (1927); James Otis, 7 B.T.A. 882 (1927). The mere fact that a person invests his time or money, or both, may, without more, tend to show that it was his purpose to succeed…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Henry P. White and Estate of Nancy A. White, Deceased, T. Leo Sullivan, Administrator, C.T.A. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1955
- Morton v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
- Ewing v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1954
- George T. McLean and Amelia G. McLean v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1961
3Cited by1 opinion
- Howell v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1963