Storey v. Comm'r
103 T.C.M. 1631, 2012 T.C. Memo. 115, 2012 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 114 (2012)
Rule of Law:
An activity, such as filmmaking, will be considered a 'trade or business' engaged in for profit under IRC § 162, rather than a hobby, if the taxpayer's primary purpose and dominant objective is to make a profit. This is determined by analyzing all facts and circumstances, with objective evidence of businesslike conduct weighing more heavily than the taxpayer's enjoyment of the activity or substantial income from other sources.
Facts:
- Lee Storey, a successful water rights attorney and law firm partner, had a long-standing interest in the arts, including directing theatrical productions.
- After her children left for college in 2003, Storey educated herself in filmmaking by taking a course at the New York Film Academy and attending community college classes.
- Storey's interest was sparked in the youth group 'Up With People' after learning her husband had been a member, and she negotiated the rights to its archival footage.
- In 2005, she formed Storey Vision, LLC, for her film production activity, maintaining separate bank accounts, a business credit card, and obtaining various forms of commercial insurance.
- During the years at issue (2006-2008), Storey developed a formal business plan, created budgets, obtained significant business loans, and hired a professional team including an award-winning producer and director.
- Storey dedicated substantial time to the project, including nights, weekends, and sabbaticals from her law practice, to conduct research, interviews, and oversee production.
- To enhance commercial viability, Storey conducted test screenings, changed the film's title based on market feedback, and attended industry conferences like the Sundance Institute's conference to network and promote the film.
- The final cut of the documentary, 'Smile 'Til It Hurts: The Up With People Story,' was completed in December 2008.
Procedural Posture:
- The Commissioner of Internal Revenue audited the joint tax returns of Lee and William Storey for the years 2006, 2007, and 2008.
- The Commissioner issued a notice of deficiency, determining that Lee Storey's filmmaking activity was not engaged in for profit under IRC § 183 and thus disallowed the expense deductions claimed on Schedule C.
- The notice of deficiency also determined that the petitioners were liable for accuracy-related penalties under IRC § 6662(a) for each of the years at issue.
- The Storeys timely filed a petition with the United States Tax Court, challenging the Commissioner's determinations of tax deficiencies and penalties.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a taxpayer's documentary filmmaking activity, conducted while maintaining a full-time, high-income legal career, considered a 'trade or business' engaged in for profit under IRC § 162, rather than a hobby under IRC § 183?
Opinions:
Majority - Judge Kroupa
Yes. A taxpayer's documentary filmmaking activity is a 'trade or business' under IRC § 162 if it is conducted with the dominant objective and intent of realizing a profit, even if the taxpayer has substantial income from another profession. The court applied the nine-factor test from Treasury Regulation § 1.183-2(b) and found the objective factors demonstrated a profit motive. The court gave significant weight to Storey's businesslike manner, which included forming an LLC, maintaining separate and complete books, creating a business plan, hiring experts, and obtaining commercial loans. While Storey had substantial outside income (factor 8) and derived personal pleasure from the activity (factor 9), these were outweighed by the objective evidence of her profit intent. The court also gave little weight to her history of losses, characterizing the years at issue as a reasonable 'startup phase' for a creative endeavor, during which losses are not dispositive of a lack of profit motive.
Analysis:
This case provides a significant precedent for taxpayers engaged in artistic or creative activities alongside a primary profession. It affirms that substantial outside income and a history of losses are not fatal to a 'trade or business' classification if the taxpayer can provide strong, objective evidence of operating the activity in a businesslike manner. The decision serves as a guide for structuring such activities to withstand an IRS 'hobby loss' challenge, emphasizing formal business structures, professional advice, and diligent record-keeping. The court's recognition of a prolonged 'startup phase' for the arts is particularly important, acknowledging that profitability in creative fields may take longer to achieve than in other industries.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: Storey v. Comm'r (2012)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"