- 26 - subsidiaries. Neither party suggested that such fair market value should be allocated between the elements involved in the exchange. Under these circumstances, we did not address the question whether, had ITT been entitled to deduct such losses, the full amount of the fair market value of the ITT stock should have been taken into account or whether a portion of that value should have been treated as a capital contribution to the subsidiaries. Furthermore, we noted that we were expressing no opinion as to what our position would be outside the consolidated return arena, i.e., in a situation where the consolidated return regulations did not apply. See International Telephone & Telegraph v. Commissioner, 77 T.C. at 84 n.26. In light of the foregoing, we do not think we are precluded by International Telephone & Telegraph, from examining the question whether the fair market value of Metals' stock should be attributed in part to the conversion of the debentures by Metals and thus not constitute an element of loss upon redemption.6 Cf. National Can Corp. v. United States, 687 F.2d 1107, 1116 (7th Cir. 1982). In our view, there were two elements involved in the issuance of Metals' stock: (1) The acquisition of the debentures and the right to obtain reimbursement for the principal amount 6 We note that neither party has suggested that any provision of the existing consolidated return regulations applies to the instant case. See National Can Corp. v. United States, 687 F.2d 1107, 1117 (7th Cir. 1982).Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011