The Hobby-Business Mash-Up
Author name
Fact # 3
Our third case, Carson, presents a very strange fact pattern. Ms. Carson’s mom created a grantor trust and transferred mom’s cattle ranch to it; Mom was trustee. Mom and stepdad were the life beneficiaries of the trust. Ms. Carson and her brother were the remaindermen. During the tax years at issue (2017-2018) Mom and stepdad were living.
Per written agreements, Ms. Carson was obligated to pay the expenses of the ranch. But she was not entitled to any of the income from ranch unless both she and her mom agreed to it. Thus between 2014 and 2019 “[Ms.] Carson made substantial financial contributions to the ranch by paying its expenses. *** The ranch made money mainly by selling cattle. The receipts from the cattle sales were reported on the returns of [Ms.] Carson’s mother.” Oral Transcript at 3. That’s just weird. Normally parents try to assign income to their children, deductions!
It is not clear from the opinion but it appears that the Carsons lived on the ranch. At any rate Judge Morrison says that “the Carson’s two children lived at the ranch helping in the ranch’s business of raising cattle for sale. For this purpose, the children used horses, some of which they also used to compete in cash-prize rodeos. The children also performed manual labor for neighbors of the ranch.”
For the tax years at issue (2017 and 2018) the Carson’s filed a Schedule F, reporting a “livestock” business. However, the only income they reported each year was the cash prizes the kids won in rodeos and the money the kids made from neighbors: some $2,700 in 2017 (all from rodeo prizes) and some $8,000 in 2018 ($6,200 from rodeo prizes). Against that modest income they reported all the expenses Ms. Carson had agreed make: $139,000 in 2017 and $134,000 in in 2018.
This had been the pattern since 2014: “During the six years 2014 to 2019, the Carson’s reported cumulative losses of $502,742 on the schedules F. For each year, these losses not only dwarfed the gross income reported on the schedule F...but they largely offset the Carson’s ordinary income [from] wages.” Yessir, assignment of deductions!
On audit, the IRS disallowed all the Schedule F deductions in excess of the Schedule F income because the IRS Revenue Agent thought that the Carsons had mis-labeled the activity and it should have been reported as a rodeo activity, not a ranching activity. And the rodeo activity was a hobby, not a business. The Carsons petitioned the Tax Court. I cannot tell whether they were represented.
Lesson #3: Hobby + Business = Business?
The basic problem, Judge Morrison decides, is that the IRS mis-analyzed how the Carsons messed up their return. The Carsons' error was mashing up the rodeo activity and ranching activity on the same Schedule. That led the IRS to mis-analyze the return by ignoring the documented arrangement between Ms. Carson. The IRS approach “supposes that the Carsons lost approximately $120,000 per year entering their children in rodeos. *** [That] makes no sense in light of our view that the deductions reported on the Schedules F mainly related to ranching.” Transcript at 8.
Here, unlike our other two cases, the taxpayers kept good records. Transcript at 8. (Ms. Carson “kept meticulous details of the expenses that were deducted on the Schedule F.”). Those records showed most expenses related to the ranching activity and only a “relatively small part” related to the rodeo activity. Id. Judge Morrison declines to parse the expenses because the IRS “did not challenge the substantiation behind the deductions” id. and thus he was not going to ding Ms. Carson for not bringing records with her to trial.
Bottom Line #3: Don’t try this at home, but once Judge Morrison accepted that the ranching activity was legit, then mashing up the hobby and business was basically harmless error. Sure, the Carsons should have reported the rodeo income on Schedule 1 and not Schedule F. Sure, they should have reported the rodeo expenses on Schedule A (and, of course, for 2018 they would not have been able to deduct any rodeo expenses because of evil §67(g)). The proper reporting position, however, would not have affected their bottom lines very much if at all. The ranching net losses would have still been able to be used to offset the modest rodeo income they had as well as most of their wage income.
Coda: The real issue here—that the IRS just missed—was the assignment of deductions. Judge Morrison notes the weirdness of allocating all the ranching income to Ms. Carson’s mom and allocating all the ranching expenses to Ms. Carson but tells us that a “mismatch of income and deductions is not prohibited under the Code per se, but may be relevant in determining the appropriateness of accounting methods and in determining the appropriate allocation of income and deductions between partners. However, these legal issues are not before the court.”
For thousands of years, human civilizations have been collecting taxes, in one form or another. From grain to beards to rubber balls, governments always found new ways to collect their due. Every April in the United States, predictable signs of spring appear: budding flowers, chirping birds, and … taxes. They may be as certain as death, but taxes aren’t a recent phenomenon; they date back thousands of years. Over the centuries, different governments all over the world have levied taxes on everything from urine to facial hair—and officials accepted payments of beers, beds, and even broomsticks. These payments went to fund government projects and services—from the pyramids of Giza to the legions of Rome. FIRST TAXES Taxation has existed for so long, it even predates coin money. Taxes could be applied to almost everything and might be paid with almost anything. In ancient Mesopotamia, this flexibility led to some rather bizarre ways to pay. For instance, the tax on burying a body in a grave was “seven kegs of beer, 420 loaves, two bushels of barley, a wool cloak, a goat, and a bed, presumably for the corpse,” according to Oklahoma State historian Tonia Sharlach. “Circa 2000-1800 B.C., there is a record of a guy who paid with 18,880 brooms and six logs,” Sharlach adds. Creative accounting of in-kind payments helped some cheat the tax man as well. “In another case, a man claimed he had no possessions whatsoever except extremely heavy millstones. So he made the tax man carry them off as his tax payment.” PHARAOHS' TAX PREPARATION Ancient Egypt was one of the first civilizations to have an organized tax system. It was developed around 3000 B.C., soon after Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt were unified by Narmer, Egypt’s first pharaoh. Egypt’s early rulers took a very personal interest in taxes. They would travel around the country with an entourage to assess their subjects’ possessions—oil, beer, ceramics, cattle, and crops—and then collect the taxes on them. The annual event became known as the Shemsu Hor, or Following of Horus. During the Old Kingdom, taxes raised enough revenue to build grand civic projects, like the pyramids at Giza. Ancient Egypt’s taxation system evolved over its 3,000-year history, becoming more sophisticated with time. In the New Kingdom (1539-1075 B.C.), government officials figured out a way to tax people on what they had earned before they’d even earned it, thanks to an invention called the nilometer. This device was used to calculate the water level of the Nile during its annual flood. Taxes would be less if the water level was too low, foretelling a drought and dying crops. Healthy water levels meant a healthy harvest, which meant higher taxes. TAX AMNESTY IN ANCIENT INDIA In India's Mauryan Empire (ca 321-185 B.C.) an annual competition of ideas was held—with the winner receiving tax amnesty. “The government solicited ideas from citizens on how to solve government problems,” Sharlach explains. “If your solution was chosen and implemented, you received a tax exemption for the rest of your life.” The Greek traveler and writer Megasthenes (ca 350-290 B.C.) gave an astonished account of the practice in his book Indica. Like most tax reform efforts, the system was far from perfect, Sharlach notes. “The problem is that nobody would have any incentive to ever solve more than one problem.” RENDER URINE UNTO CAESAR The Roman emperor Vespasian (r. A.D. 69-79) may not be a household name like Augustus or Marcus Aurelius, but he brought stability to the empire during a turbulent time—partly through an innovative tax on people’s pee. Ammonia was a valuable commodity in ancient Rome. It could clean dirt and grease from clothing. Tanners used it to make leather. Farmers used it as fertilizer. And people even used it to whiten their teeth. All this ammonia was derived from human urine, much of it gathered from Rome’s public restrooms. And like all valuable products, the government figured out how to tax it. Some wealthy Romans, including Vespasian’s own son Titus, objected to the urine tax. According to historian Suetonius (writing around A.D. 120), Titus told his father he found the tax revolting, to which Vespasian replied, “Pecunia non olet,” or “Money does not stink.” ITEMIZATIONS FOR AZTECS At its height in the 15th and 16th centuries, the Aztec Empire was wealthy and powerful, thanks to taxation. Historian Michael E. Smith has studied its tax collection system and found it to be remarkably complex, with different kinds of items collected at different levels of government. All taxes made their way to the Aztec central governing body, the Triple Alliance. There they kept meticulous records of who had sent what. Many of these records survive today. The most famous are found in the Matrícula de Tributos, a colorful illustrated registry filled with pictographs showing exactly how many jaguar skins, precious stones, corn, cocoa, rubber balls, gold bars, honey, salt, and textiles the government collected each tax season. RUSSIA’S FASHION TAX Widespread use of coins and currency had a leveling effect on taxation systems, but rulers were not above applying some taxation muscle to achieve their ends. In 1698, Russian reformer Peter the Great sought to make Russia resemble “modern” nations in western Europe whose clean, close shaves Peter equated with modernization. After he returned to Russia, the tsar instituted a beard tax on his citizens, who favored beards. Any Russian man who wished to grow a beard had to pay a tax—peasants paid a small fee while nobles and merchants could pay as much as a hundred rubles. Men who had paid the tax were also required to carry beard tokens wherever they went to prove that they'd paid their taxes for the privilege. Peter the Great’s beard tax did not last. Catherine the Great repealed it in 1772. Source: National Geographic By: Editors of National Geographic
Over the past year, we, as business owners, have been hearing that we will need to report our business to the federal government if we are of certain legal entities. That is true. Under the US Corporate Transparency Act, all limited liability companies (LLCs), companies or other entities formed via a Secretary of State office would have to file a report showing all owners who own 25% or more of the business’s equity. That would be direct ownership (via direct ownership) or via third party entities like a trust. A recent U.S. District Court case in Alabama has ruled the reporting, and the Act, unconstitutional. At this time the Department of Treasury says it will appeal the ruling but will also comply with the ruling meaning that reporting is suspended until further notice. Recently, a client sent us a copy of the reporting form sent to them by a third-party company telling them they had to file this or suffer severe penalties. That was true before the court ruling. The company was asking for a fee to file this form. I have no problem paying a company to do a job, but I have an issue when you get an email or mailing saying you must do something from a company that you or I know nothing about. That is my issue here. My firm and I are monitoring the situation and will let you know if you need to file it and when. If it becomes necessary to file, we will be able to help you file the appropriate form for a fee. Until then, please ignore anything you get saying you must file a form for Beneficial Ownership. If you have any questions, please contact my office.
If you’re a fan of home improvement shows, you know how this goes: The clients, usually a couple hoping to build, buy or renovate a home, are mostly focused on the aesthetics — the kitchen countertops, the bathroom tile, the light fixtures, the wainscoting. But, of course, there’s more to designing a home than picking the flooring or the fixtures. Without a strong foundation, sturdy walls and a dependable roof, the couple’s beautiful house won’t hold up well against the elements, age and other risk factors during the years their family lives there. Their real estate agent or contractor often has to remind them about what’s really important as they move forward. And I have to say, I get where those pros are coming from every time — because the same holds true for building a family’s financial house. (Though I’ve yet to see an entire television network devoted to designing a financial portfolio.) If you’re working with a financial adviser, you may have heard him or her refer to drawing up a “blueprint” for reaching your financial goals. And that’s an apt description. When you’re building your fiscal house, you’ll want to be sure you have a detailed plan that includes every aspect of your financial future and the methods and materials you’ll be using to help get you to your objectives. Your financial portfolio — the collection of assets you’ll use to create a safe and comfortable future — should be allocated and managed in a way that helps you weather economic downturns, market volatility, fluctuating interest rates, rising inflation, risks that come with aging and other changes in your life. Creating the blueprint for your financial house What should your financial blueprint look like? It will be different for everyone. But a secure fiscal house will have the same basic characteristics as a well-built home. A strong foundation Your most stable assets typically will form the foundation of your financial portfolio. Although no investment is without risk, these are generally assets you can count on to stay solid — and provide a reliable income — when the economy or your personal finances take a hit or feel shaky. Some examples include: Savings and certificates of deposit (CDs), which are protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) Government bonds, which are backed by the U.S. Department of the Treasury Fixed and fixed index annuities that are protected by a reputable insurance company. Sturdy walls The “walls” of your fiscal house should be sturdy — but because they can be repaired or rebuilt more easily than the foundation, these assets don’t have to be quite as invulnerable. Investments at this level can add value to your portfolio (by providing income, income protection and diversification), but they also may be exposed to moderate risk, so there’s some potential for growth. A few examples include: Corporate and municipal bonds Conservative dividend investments Private real estate investment trusts (REITs) A dependable roof Of course, you want your roof to hold up against whatever the elements might throw at it. But if it is damaged, you likely can fix or replace it without the whole house falling in — as long as the lower levels are built to last. The roof of your fiscal house represents the investments that carry the highest risk you can tolerate (both financially and emotionally). And they can help you grow your money for the future. These assets might include: Stocks Mutual funds Exchange-traded funds (ETFs) Variable annuities Where to start Of course, every individual and family has different needs — and every financial plan will (or should, at least) be a little bit different to accommodate those needs. But if you’re looking for a good starting point, you may want to use the “Rule of 100” to determine how your assets should be allocated when building your fiscal house. That means taking the number 100, subtracting your age and using the difference to determine the percentage of your money you want to invest in riskier assets to maximize growth. If, for instance, you’re 45 and in no rush to retire, you might feel comfortable investing 55% of your portfolio in stocks or ETFs. You’ll get the growth you’re looking for, but should you lose money in a market downturn, you’ll still have several years to recover. But if you’re closer to retirement — let’s say 65 — you may want to limit the risk in your portfolio to 35% or less. You still can benefit from some growth, but with less time to recover from a market decline, you may choose to play it a bit safer. Don’t forget ongoing maintenance Making occasional upgrades and repairs can be an important part of maintaining your home’s value. And the same holds true for your portfolio. It can be helpful to reevaluate your investments and investing strategies at least once a year to be sure your plan stays aligned with your goals. Over time, asset allocations may shift based on market performance, and you may need to rebalance your portfolio. You also may find that your tolerance for risk has changed, and a little remodeling is necessary. Or, if you realize your original design just isn’t functional for your family, you may want to seek a second opinion or go for a complete renovation. You don’t have to look hard to find an example of why it’s so critical to design and maintain your fiscal house for the long haul. Just a few short years ago, pretty much everyone’s financial portfolio was doing well thanks to an 11-year bull market. Then in March 2020, the COVID crisis rolled in and caught everyone off guard. And we all got a good reminder of how important it is to build a fiscal house that holds up against the storms we can predict — and those we can’t. Is your fiscal house move-in ready? One thing we’ve all learned from watching home improvement shows is that doing it yourself isn’t always the best way to go. Similarly, some parts of investing may be doable on your own — and even fun. And you should have plenty of input into what you want from your plan. But you’ll likely find it makes sense to work with a pro when you’re drawing up your overall financial blueprint — or making any big choices or changes. Mistakes and oversights can be costly, especially when you’re closing in on retirement. You’ll need a portfolio that’s carefully planned to keep you secure for the many years ahead. Kim Franke-Folstad contributed to this article. The appearances in Kiplinger were obtained through a PR program. The columnist received assistance from a public relations firm in preparing this piece for submission to Kiplinger.com. Kiplinger was not compensated in any way. Kurt Supe, John Culpepper and Brian Quick offer securities through cfd Investments, Inc., Registered Broker/Dealer, Member FINRA &SIPC, 2704 South Goyer Road, Kokomo, IN 46902, 765-453-9600. Kurt Supe, Andrew Drufke and Brian Quick offer advisory services through Creative Financial Designs, Inc., Registered Investment Adviser. Creative Financial Group is a separate and unaffiliated company. The CFD Companies do not provide legal or tax advice. Credit: ANDREW DRUFKE
Want more information?
(812)-883-6938
906 W. Mulberry St
P.O. Box 225
Salem, Indiana 47167
Latest news
For thousands of years, human civilizations have been collecting taxes, in one form or another. From grain to beards to rubber balls, governments always found new ways to collect their due. Every April in the United States, predictable signs of spring appear: budding flowers, chirping birds, and … taxes. They may be as certain as death, but taxes aren’t a recent phenomenon; they date back thousands of years. Over the centuries, different governments all over the world have levied taxes on everything from urine to facial hair—and officials accepted payments of beers, beds, and even broomsticks. These payments went to fund government projects and services—from the pyramids of Giza to the legions of Rome. FIRST TAXES Taxation has existed for so long, it even predates coin money. Taxes could be applied to almost everything and might be paid with almost anything. In ancient Mesopotamia, this flexibility led to some rather bizarre ways to pay. For instance, the tax on burying a body in a grave was “seven kegs of beer, 420 loaves, two bushels of barley, a wool cloak, a goat, and a bed, presumably for the corpse,” according to Oklahoma State historian Tonia Sharlach. “Circa 2000-1800 B.C., there is a record of a guy who paid with 18,880 brooms and six logs,” Sharlach adds. Creative accounting of in-kind payments helped some cheat the tax man as well. “In another case, a man claimed he had no possessions whatsoever except extremely heavy millstones. So he made the tax man carry them off as his tax payment.” PHARAOHS' TAX PREPARATION Ancient Egypt was one of the first civilizations to have an organized tax system. It was developed around 3000 B.C., soon after Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt were unified by Narmer, Egypt’s first pharaoh. Egypt’s early rulers took a very personal interest in taxes. They would travel around the country with an entourage to assess their subjects’ possessions—oil, beer, ceramics, cattle, and crops—and then collect the taxes on them. The annual event became known as the Shemsu Hor, or Following of Horus. During the Old Kingdom, taxes raised enough revenue to build grand civic projects, like the pyramids at Giza. Ancient Egypt’s taxation system evolved over its 3,000-year history, becoming more sophisticated with time. In the New Kingdom (1539-1075 B.C.), government officials figured out a way to tax people on what they had earned before they’d even earned it, thanks to an invention called the nilometer. This device was used to calculate the water level of the Nile during its annual flood. Taxes would be less if the water level was too low, foretelling a drought and dying crops. Healthy water levels meant a healthy harvest, which meant higher taxes. TAX AMNESTY IN ANCIENT INDIA In India's Mauryan Empire (ca 321-185 B.C.) an annual competition of ideas was held—with the winner receiving tax amnesty. “The government solicited ideas from citizens on how to solve government problems,” Sharlach explains. “If your solution was chosen and implemented, you received a tax exemption for the rest of your life.” The Greek traveler and writer Megasthenes (ca 350-290 B.C.) gave an astonished account of the practice in his book Indica. Like most tax reform efforts, the system was far from perfect, Sharlach notes. “The problem is that nobody would have any incentive to ever solve more than one problem.” RENDER URINE UNTO CAESAR The Roman emperor Vespasian (r. A.D. 69-79) may not be a household name like Augustus or Marcus Aurelius, but he brought stability to the empire during a turbulent time—partly through an innovative tax on people’s pee. Ammonia was a valuable commodity in ancient Rome. It could clean dirt and grease from clothing. Tanners used it to make leather. Farmers used it as fertilizer. And people even used it to whiten their teeth. All this ammonia was derived from human urine, much of it gathered from Rome’s public restrooms. And like all valuable products, the government figured out how to tax it. Some wealthy Romans, including Vespasian’s own son Titus, objected to the urine tax. According to historian Suetonius (writing around A.D. 120), Titus told his father he found the tax revolting, to which Vespasian replied, “Pecunia non olet,” or “Money does not stink.” ITEMIZATIONS FOR AZTECS At its height in the 15th and 16th centuries, the Aztec Empire was wealthy and powerful, thanks to taxation. Historian Michael E. Smith has studied its tax collection system and found it to be remarkably complex, with different kinds of items collected at different levels of government. All taxes made their way to the Aztec central governing body, the Triple Alliance. There they kept meticulous records of who had sent what. Many of these records survive today. The most famous are found in the Matrícula de Tributos, a colorful illustrated registry filled with pictographs showing exactly how many jaguar skins, precious stones, corn, cocoa, rubber balls, gold bars, honey, salt, and textiles the government collected each tax season. RUSSIA’S FASHION TAX Widespread use of coins and currency had a leveling effect on taxation systems, but rulers were not above applying some taxation muscle to achieve their ends. In 1698, Russian reformer Peter the Great sought to make Russia resemble “modern” nations in western Europe whose clean, close shaves Peter equated with modernization. After he returned to Russia, the tsar instituted a beard tax on his citizens, who favored beards. Any Russian man who wished to grow a beard had to pay a tax—peasants paid a small fee while nobles and merchants could pay as much as a hundred rubles. Men who had paid the tax were also required to carry beard tokens wherever they went to prove that they'd paid their taxes for the privilege. Peter the Great’s beard tax did not last. Catherine the Great repealed it in 1772. Source: National Geographic By: Editors of National Geographic
Over the past year, we, as business owners, have been hearing that we will need to report our business to the federal government if we are of certain legal entities. That is true. Under the US Corporate Transparency Act, all limited liability companies (LLCs), companies or other entities formed via a Secretary of State office would have to file a report showing all owners who own 25% or more of the business’s equity. That would be direct ownership (via direct ownership) or via third party entities like a trust. A recent U.S. District Court case in Alabama has ruled the reporting, and the Act, unconstitutional. At this time the Department of Treasury says it will appeal the ruling but will also comply with the ruling meaning that reporting is suspended until further notice. Recently, a client sent us a copy of the reporting form sent to them by a third-party company telling them they had to file this or suffer severe penalties. That was true before the court ruling. The company was asking for a fee to file this form. I have no problem paying a company to do a job, but I have an issue when you get an email or mailing saying you must do something from a company that you or I know nothing about. That is my issue here. My firm and I are monitoring the situation and will let you know if you need to file it and when. If it becomes necessary to file, we will be able to help you file the appropriate form for a fee. Until then, please ignore anything you get saying you must file a form for Beneficial Ownership. If you have any questions, please contact my office.