Aizawa v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
99 T.C. 197 (1992)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
In 1981, Joseph and Noriyo Aizawa (plaintiffs) purchased property and paid part of the purchase price with a $90,000 loan from the sellers. In return for the loan, the Aizawas gave the sellers a recourse mortgage on the property, which was secured by collateral. In 1987, the Aizawas defaulted on the loan repayments. At the time, the Aizawas’ basis in the collateral was $100,091.38. The sellers obtained a default judgment of $133,506.91 against the Aizawas, which included the loan’s principal, interest, attorney’s fees, and court costs. The collateral’s foreclosure sale price was only $72,700, which was the amount realized on the sale for the purpose of claiming a loss deduction under § 1001(a) of the federal tax code. The Aizawas applied § 1001(a) to claim a $70,898.29 loss on the foreclosure sale, a figure that the Aizawas derived by using a complex formula incorporating all of the relevant sums. The commissioner of internal revenue (commissioner) (defendant) subtracted the Aizawas’ mortgage principal from their basis in the collateral, and calculated that the Aizawas’ actual loss was only $10,091.38. The commissioner disallowed the balance of the Aizawas’ loss deduction. Aizawa filed a petition challenging the commissioner’s determination.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Tannenwald, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.