Guy Schoenecker, Inc., Business Incentives, Inc., and Carousel By Guy, Inc. - Page 26

                                                 - 26 -                                                    

            competency and value to the company of a CEO.  It is the                                       
            accomplishments of the executive and not necessarily the hours                                 
            worked, although the working of long hours is to be considered.                                
            Again, petitioner cites the responsibility for BI's success and                                
            "irreplaceability" of Mr. Schoenecker.  While Mr. Schoenecker                                  
            would certainly be a great loss to the company were he not there,                              
            it is fairly clear from this record that there are other                                       
            competent officers of BI, such as Mr. Shaw and, during the latter                              
            years here in issue, Mr. Schoenecker's son Larry was taking more                               
            responsibility for the business.  However, the fact that there                                 
            are other competent officers employed by BI does not detract from                              
            the fact that Mr. Schoenecker is a very competent CEO.                                         
                 Petitioner points out that the growth, profitability, and                                 
            financial condition of the business are important in determining                               
            whether compensation paid to an employee is reasonable.  Home                                  
            Interiors & Gifts, Inc. v. Commissioner, 73 T.C. 1142, 1157-1158                               
            (1980).  The record here shows that BI has grown substantially                                 
            since its incorporation in 1950.  Certainly that growth is to an                               
            appreciable extent due to the work of Mr. Schoenecker.  However,                               
            unlike the situation in Home Interiors & Gifts, Inc. v.                                        
            Commissioner, supra, the growth of BI was in line with that of                                 
            BI's competitors.                                                                              
                 Petitioner contends that an unrelated investor would be                                   
            satisfied with the return on his investment in BI from the income                              
            of BI after the payment of Mr. Schoenecker's salary.  Respondent                               



Page:  Previous  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011