- 24 -
v. Wilkinson, 740 P.2d 1244, 1254-1256 (Utah 1987); Lach v.
Deseret Bank, 746 P.2d 802 (Utah Ct. App. 1987). In the instant
case, the deeds from the sellers to the buyers were held in
escrow and were to be recorded on July 2, 1984, after the payment
of the first installment.
Respondent does not dispute petitioners' equitable
conversion position, yet, instead, continues to argue that the
December 1983 agreements were options and not sales, so that the
sellers would continue to bear the risk of loss. The question of
risk of loss is, according to respondent, dependent upon the
ultimate question of whether, for purposes of petitioners'
Federal tax, the December 1983 agreements constitute sales or
options. To some degree, respondent's position begs the
question.
Petitioners' analysis of Utah law, on the question of
equitable conversion, reveals that, once a contract for sale of
realty becomes effective, the benefits and burdens of ownership
accrue to the buyer as a matter of law. The form of the December
1983 agreements supports petitioners' equitable conversion
argument. Moreover, as petitioners point out, the benefits and
burdens of ownership have been accepted as ownership for Federal
tax purposes. See, e.g., Baird v. Commissioner 68 T.C. 115
(1977); Lach v. Deseret Bank, supra. In addition, Utah courts
have applied the doctrine of equitable conversion for sales and
inheritance tax purposes. See In re Estate of Willson, 499 P.2d
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011