1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564 | Tax Ct. | 1987
MEMORANDUM OPINION
DINAN,
Many of the facts have been stipulated. The stipulations of fact and the exhibits attached thereto are incorporated by this reference.
At the time the petition was filed, petitioner resided in Garden City, Kansas. Petitioner was an irrigation sprinkler salesman until he retired in 1980. In 1979 petitioner purchased a 21.875 percent working interest in the Minter-Wilson #1 lease, a gas well. In 1979 he purchased similar interests in two more gas wells. Petitioner did not have any experience in the oil and gas business and relied on the suggestions of his friends as1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564" label="1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564" no-link"="" number="4" pagescheme="<span class=">1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564">*567 to which leases he should purchase.
A working interest in a gas well makes the interest owner liable for the operation and production of the well. The working interest also gives the owner the right to the delivery of gas in kind so that the owner can sell the gas to a preferred purchaser. Operating a working interest in a gas well requires expertise in drilling, geology and the oil business. Inexperienced owners of working interests, therefore, frequently "farm out" the management of a well to an operation company in exchange for a percentage of the profits from the production of the well. See generally Arthur Young's Oil and Gas: Federal Income Taxation, sec. 13 (1985).
Petitioner and the other working interest owners farmed out the operation of Minter-Wilson #1 to Continental Energy (Continental). The owners and Continental signed a standard operating form which gave Continental the right to control the operation of the well, to make expenditures up to $ 10,000, and to sell the gas produced by the well. If an expense was greater than $ 10,000, Continental was required to consult with the owners of the working interest. Otherwise, Continental had the power to make expenditures1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564" label="1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564" no-link"="" number="5" pagescheme="<span class=">1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564">*568 for which the owners would be liable. Continental could only be removed from the operation of the well by a vote of 51 percent of the ownership interests.
The term "trade or business" is not defined in
The question of whether particular activities related to transactions entered into for profit constitute a trade or business arises frequently in real estate matters where the ownership of property may be either a business or an investment. The passive ownership of rental property is not a business.
In a case involving the accumulated earnings tax,
The line to be drawn between the ownership of a working interest which is equivalent to being in the oil and gas business and one which is akin to a mere corporate stock investment depends on the magnitude of the interest and whether or not the owner has direct operating and management responsibilities. * * *
Courts have examined the "magnitude of the interest" both in terms of the number of wells owned and the percentage of ownership in the working interest.
First, if the taxpayer owns multiple wells, then the number of interests owned can indicate that the taxpayer is1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564" label="1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564" no-link"="" number="8" pagescheme="<span class=">1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564">*571 in the gas business. That was the situation in
Second, if the taxpayer owns a sufficient part of the working interest in a well or wells, then he may be in a trade or business. In
The facts in
However, because of petitioner's lack of experience in the gas business and because he held a minority working interest in the well, we find that petitioner was unable to play an active part in the management and operation of the well. Although the owners of the well collectively have overall supervision and control over the well, which Continental operates for them, the petitioner played no role in that activity. 1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564" label="1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564" no-link"="" number="10" pagescheme="<span class=">1987 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 564">*573 The right to participate in the operation of a well is not enough to constitute active participation in the business. Petitioner could not have influenced the decisions of the operating company because he had no working knowledge of how to operate a well. Petitioner could not exert any influence through his ownership because he had a minority interest, and could not remove Continental without the consent of at least two other owners. 3 Petitioner's interest in the well was merely a passive investment. His income from the operation of the well, therefore, was not received from a trade or business. We find that petitioner was not subject to the self-employment tax. Accordingly, we hold for the petitioner on this issue.
Footnotes
1. All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as in effect during the year in issue, unless otherwise indicated. All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. ↩
2. Lois Hendrickson is a party to this action solely because she filed a joint return for 1982 with Harold Hendrickson. All further references to petitioner will be to Harold Hendrickson. ↩
3. Respondent contends that there was an agency relationship between petitioner and Continental. As we have already discussed, petitioner did not have the requisite control over Continental for an agency relationship to arise. See generally
3 Am. Jur. 2d Agency sec. 2↩ (1986).