McKelvey

McKelvey v. Commissioner

Good Law
76 F. App'x 806
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 24, 2003No. 02-74209; IRS No. 1971-00California283 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Robert McKelvey appeals the Tax Court’s ruling that he is not entitled to deduct various expenses relating to the development of his tree farm. We agree with the Tax Court that the claimed deductions are “start-up expenses” that are not immediately deductible. Accordingly we affirm.

DISCUSSION

In a preliminary matter, we agree with the Commissioner that McKelvey’s notice of appeal is timely. A misdirected notice of appeal may be deemed timely by application of 28 U.S.C. § 1631 , authorizing “federal courts to transfer appeals in civil matters in order to cure a lack of subject matter or appellate jurisdiction.” Kolek v. Engen, 869 F.2d 1281, 1284 (9th Cir.1989).

On the merits, the Tax Court correctly rejected McKelvey’s claimed business deductions because he was not yet “carrying on a trade or business” as required by 26 U.S.C. § 162 (c). The record indicates that McKelvey had only investigated the possibility of a tree farm by conducting studies and making a pilot planting. Even at the time of the Tax Court’s decision, McKelvey had not planted trees, harvested trees, or even decided what trees to plant. Accordingly, the Tax Court did not err by ruling that…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.