Barry B. Bealor and Nancy L. Bealor, et al. - Page 26

                                       - 114 -                                        
          the bank.  The bank's rental payments were equal to Frank Lyon's            
          principal and interest payments on the mortgage.  The bank had an           
          option to repurchase the building by taking over the mortgage and           
          paying Frank Lyon's initial $500,000 investment.  The Supreme               
          Court approved Frank Lyon Co.'s deduction of depreciation,                  
          interest, and other expenses associated with its ownership of the           
          building.  The Court concluded that the company's purchase was "a           
          genuine multiple-party transaction with economic substance which            
          is compelled or encouraged by business or regulatory realities,             
          is imbued with tax-independent considerations, and is not shaped            
          solely by tax-avoidance features that have meaningless labels               
          attached".  Id. at 583-584.                                                 
               Petitioners here have failed to establish that their                   
          employee leasing transactions had economic substance similar to             
          the arrangement in Frank Lyon.  Under the Frank Lyon criteria,              
          the transactions before us were not "imbued with tax-independent            
          considerations".  They are in fact characterized by "tax-                   
          avoidance features that have meaningless labels attached".                  
               Petitioners cite other cases of legitimate financial                   
          arrangements in which an investor engaged in a "circular off-               
          setting group of obligations".  See, e.g., Emershaw v.                      
          Commissioner, 949 F.2d 841, 848 (6th Cir. 1991), affg. T.C. Memo.           
          1990-246.  In such cases the taxpayer proved that he "minimized             
          potential cash-flow problems by arranging that income from his              
          investment will cover the obligations he has incurred in making             




Page:  Previous  104  105  106  107  108  109  110  111  112  113  114  115  116  117  118  119  120  121  122  123  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011