Sugar Land Ranch Development, LLC v. Commissioner

T.C. Memo. 2018–21 (2018)

From our private database of 47,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Sugar Land Ranch Development, LLC v. Commissioner

United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo. 2018–21 (2018)

Facts

Sugar Land Ranch Development, LLC (SLRD) (plaintiff) was formed in 1998 to acquire land in Sugar Land, Texas, and develop it into residential lots and commercial tracts. That year, SLRD purchased 888.5 acres of land consisting of four contiguous parcels. The land, formerly an oil field, bordered a planned community being developed by parties related to SLRD. SLRD planned to clean up the property and subdivide it into residential units for inclusion in that community. To that end, between 1998 and 2008, SLRD engaged in several property-development activities. During that period, SLRD sold or otherwise disposed of relatively small portions of the property. In late 2008, amid the subprime-mortgage crisis, SLRD’s managers decided to abandon all subdivision, development, and sales efforts and instead hold the property as an investment until the market recovered enough to sell it. This decision was memorialized in a 2008 unanimous consent and a 2009 member resolution. From 2008 to 2012, SLRD did not develop or market the land, nor did it subdivide or sell any lots. In 2011, Taylor Morrison of Texas, Inc. (Taylor Morrison) approached SLRD about purchasing three contiguous parcels, totaling 580.2 acres (TM parcels). In 2012, SLRD sold the TM parcels to Taylor Morrison for a lump sum. Afterward, SLRD decided to close out its property holdings by selling its remaining 133.2 acres in four transactions between 2012 and 2016. On its 2012 tax return, SLRD reported an aggregate capital gain of $9.5 million from the sale of the TM parcels. The commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (defendant) assessed a deficiency, reclassifying the gain as ordinary income. SLRD petitioned the tax court for a redetermination.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Thornton, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 905,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 905,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,100 briefs, keyed to 995 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 905,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,100 briefs - keyed to 995 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership