Given the overall circumstances—Crow showered Thomas with gifts before and after, Thomas's mother kept living there, Crow paid for improvements—the only reasonable interpretation is: Thomas and Crow structured the transaction as a loss solely to avoid reporting it.
"Thomas claims he lost money and didn’t think he needed to disclose it — but the rules are clear that profit/loss isn’t a factor in disclosure"
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/17/politics/clarence-thomas-amend-disclosure-gop-megadonor/index.html
Follow
@maxkennerly Also, if a sitting justice on the supreme court can't figure out the financial disclosure laws that bind him, what does that say about the average American's ability to decipher tax law that binds them?
