Garber Industries Holding Co., Inc. - Page 4

                                        - 4 -                                         
          such stock.  The Garber brothers’ parents, who are deceased,                
          never owned any of petitioner’s stock.                                      
               On or about July 10, 1996, petitioner underwent a                      
          reorganization described in section 368(a)(1)(D) (the                       
          reorganization).  Pursuant to the reorganization, petitioner                
          canceled Charles’s original stock certificate for 3,492.85 shares           
          and issued a new certificate to him for 386 shares.  As a result,           
          Charles’s percentage ownership of petitioner decreased from 68              
          percent to 19 percent, and Kenneth’s percentage ownership of                
          petitioner increased from 26 percent to 65 percent.2                        
               On April 1, 1998, Kenneth sold all of his shares in                    
          petitioner to Charles (the 1998 transaction).  As a result of the           
          1998 transaction, Charles’s percentage ownership of petitioner              
          increased from 19 percent to 84 percent.                                    
               On its 1998 consolidated Federal income tax return,                    
          petitioner claimed an NOL deduction in the amount of $808,935 for           
          regular tax purposes and $728,041 for alternative minimum tax               
          (AMT) purposes.  As one of the adjustments giving rise to the               
          deficiencies here in question, respondent adjusted the amount of            
          petitioner’s 1998 NOL deduction, for both regular tax and AMT               
          purposes, to $121,258 pursuant to section 382(b).  Petitioner               
          assigns error to that adjustment.                                           

               2  The parties provided no information regarding the                   
          reorganization other than the fact of its occurrence and the                
          resulting changes in percentage ownership interests.                        





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011