UNITED STATES TAX COURT
Agency decision
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
T.C. Memo. 1999-178
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
TIMOTHY AND DEBORAH PROVOST, Petitioners v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Docket No. 5772-98.
Filed May 28, 1999.
Timothy Provost, pro se.
Caroline Ades-Pierri, for respondent.
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
FOLEY, Judge:
By notices dated December 31, 1997,
respondent determined the following deficiencies, additions to
tax, and penalty, relating to petitioners' Federal income taxes:
- 2 Additions to Tax
Sec. 6651(a)(1)
Sec. 6654
Penalty
Sec. 6662
Year
Deficiency
1989
$45,048
$9,010
--
$11,143
1990
40,128
10,032
$2,642
--
1991
23,336
4,445
1,207
--
1992
35,613
8,361
1,448
--
All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in
effect for the years in issue, and all Rule references are to the
Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Petitioners, husband and wife, resided in Perrineville, New
Jersey, at the time their petition was filed.
In 1985, Mr.
Provost and two other investors formed Sandew Homes, Inc.
(Sandew), an S corporation.
Mr. Provost guaranteed several
mortgage loans relating to properties owned by Sandew.
On their
1989 return, petitioners deducted a $159,565 ordinary loss, a
$58,863 net operating loss carryforward from 1988, and $29,086 of
mortgage interest payments, relating to Sandew.
Petitioners
filed their 1989 return on April 7, 1994.
On July 12, 1993, petitioners filed a petition in the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey under chapter 11
of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.
Petitioners' bankruptcy action was
converted from a chapter 11 to a chapter 7 case on July 11, 1994.
On April 14, 1997, petitioners were discharged from bankruptcy.
- 3 On December 31, 1997, respondent mailed notices of
deficiency to petitioners relating to tax years 1989, 1990, and
1991.
Petitioners filed their 1990 and 1991 tax returns on April
14, 1998.
During 1990, petitioners sold BHC Securities, Inc.
stock but did not report the sale on their 1990 return.
During
1991, petitioners sold Bear Stearns Colonial State Bank stock.
On their 1991 return, petitioners reported a $5,505 capital loss
relating to this sale.
OPINION
Petitioners contend that, pursuant to section 6503(h),
assessment of their 1989 tax is barred by the expiration of the
period of limitation.
Petitioners' contention is meritless.
Petitioners filed their bankruptcy petition on July 12, 1993,
filed their 1989 return on April 7, 1994, and were discharged
from bankruptcy on April 14, 1997.
Thus, pursuant to section
6501, the period of limitation for issuing a notice of deficiency
relating to petitioners' 1989 tax would not expire until June
2000 (i.e., 60 days after petitioners' discharge from bankruptcy
plus the 3-year limitation period on assessment).
See secs.
6501(a), 6503(h); 11 U.S.C. sec. 362(a), (c)(2) (1994).
Respondent issued the 1989 notice of deficiency on December 31,
1997.
Accordingly, assessment of petitioners' 1989 tax was not
barred by the expiration of the period of limitation.
- 4 Respondent determined that petitioners:
(1) Were not
entitled to deductions for a $159,565 ordinary loss and a $58,863
net operating loss carryforward, relating to 1989; (2) failed to
report $2,302 and $4,495 of capital gain income relating to stock
sales in 1990 and 1991, respectively; (3) failed to file timely
returns relating to 1989, 1990, and 1991 and are liable for
section 6651 additions to tax; (4) failed to pay estimated income
tax relating to 1990 and 1991 and are liable for section 6654
additions to tax; and (5) were negligent in determining their
1989 tax liability and are liable for a section 6662 penalty.
Petitioners bear the burden of proof, yet have failed to present
sufficient credible evidence to establish that respondent's
determinations are incorrect.
111, 115 (1933).
See Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S.
Accordingly, we sustain respondent's
determinations.
Respondent also determined that petitioners, in 1989, were
not entitled to deduct $29,086 of mortgage interest relating to
properties owned by Sandew.
Petitioners contend that Sandew was
bankrupt, and, as guarantors of Sandew's loans, petitioners were
obligated to pay Sandew's interest expenses and, therefore,
entitled to a deduction pursuant to section 163.
Generally, a
guarantor is not entitled to an interest expense deduction with
respect to payments made in fulfillment of a mere guaranty
obligation.
See Hynes v. Commissioner, 74 T.C. 1266, 1287-1288
- 5 (1980).
The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, however, has
held that if, at the time the interest is paid, the taxpayer has
a fixed, noncontingent, legal obligation to pay the interest and
reimbursement is barred by bankruptcy, the taxpayer is entitled
to an interest expense deduction.
See Stratmore v. Commissioner,
785 F.2d 419, 423 (3d Cir. 1986), revg. T.C. Memo. 1984-547.
Under Golsen v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 742, 756-757 (1970), affd.
445 F.2d 985 (10th Cir. 1971), we are obligated to follow the law
as stated by the Court of Appeals in the circuit to which this
case is appealable.
Petitioners have failed, however, to
establish that, at the time the interest was paid, they had a
primary legal obligation to pay the interest.
In addition, they
have failed to establish that Sandew was bankrupt and that
reimbursement of the interest payments was barred by Sandew's
bankruptcy.
Accordingly, we sustain respondent's determination.
Contentions we have not addressed are irrelevant, moot or
meritless.
To reflect the foregoing and concessions by the parties,
Decision will be entered
under Rule 155.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.