Because state governments are hard pressed for revenue, state tax authorities are getting more aggressive in audits, and this has an impact on the horse and ranching industries. In a new case, the Minnesota Tax Court ruled against the taxpayers who operated a horse and cattle ranch.
Ranchers who have a history of losses are the ones most likely to be audited by state or federal tax authorities.
The taxpayers in this case consisted of a husband and wife who maintained Scottish Highlander cattle as well as horses, and operated Green Oaks Ranch and Stables, Inc., an S corporation.
1. The taxpayers began breeding and raising Scottish Highlander cattle, but had no formal education in cattle or the business of livestock breeding.
2. The court said that the taxpayers “provided little evidence of businesslike operations at Green Oaks.” The taxpayers “never developed or maintained a business plan for Green Oaks or any financial objectives in spite of huge expenses and minimal income.”
3. The court noted that the taxpayers engaged in limited advertising, and in fact spent no money on advertising in any industry magazines.
4. The court said that while their operation did result in some revenue, this revenue was minimal compared to the significant losses incurred.
5. The court noted that Mr. Molnar attended the University of Minnesota during the tax years in issue, but “he did not pursue a degree or even take a course in business, accounting, management or marketing, which may have provided him with knowledge and expertise in the business operation of Green Oaks.”
6. The court said that the taxpayers did not pay or receive any salary.
7. The court said that Mr. Molnar “had little knowledge of when cattle were purchased or sold, or the prices paid for cattle.”
8. Mr. Molnar claimed he worked 30 to 40 hours per week on the ranch, but the court said “there are no records to show how this time was spent.”
9. The court noted that the taxpayers did not have insurance on their animals: “Thus, when a bull, Willie, slipped on some ice and eventually died, Green Oaks received nothing for its loss. Business assets, as opposed to recreational assets, are normally insured.”
10. The court concluded that the taxpayers failed to show that their activity was operated in a businesslike manner, and denied their tax deductions.
This is one of a series of adverse cases in state and federal Tax Courts that emphasize that a formal business plan, with substantive cost projections and other elements, is crucial in order to prove that the activity is operated in a businesslike manner. In this regard, the court said:
“If a taxpayer undertakes an activity in a businesslike manner, including the keeping of books and records or the development of a business plan, a profit motive may be implied.”
John Alan Cohan is a lawyer who has served the livestock, horse and farming industries since l98l.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here