- 9 -
We agree with respondent. The true owner of
income-producing property, such as the Liu accounts, is the one
with beneficial ownership, rather than mere legal title.
Serianni v. Commissioner, 80 T.C. 1090, 1104 (1983), affd.
765 F.2d 1051 (11th Cir.1985); Hook v. Commissioner, 58 T.C.
267, 273, 276 (1972). It is the ability to command the property,
or enjoy its economic benefits, that marks a true owner. Hang v.
Commissioner, 95 T.C. 74, 80 (1990). The Liu accounts are owned
by the person or persons who derive "readily realizable economic
value" from these accounts, and a person derives the requisite
value when he or she has the freedom to dispose of the accounts'
funds at will. Rutkin v. United States, 343 U.S. 130, 137
(1952).
We are unable to find that petitioners were not the true
owners of the Liu accounts.4 Although petitioners elicited
testimony at trial in an attempt to establish that they did not
own these accounts, we are unpersuaded by this testimony. For
the same reasons stated above, we find that none of this
testimony is credible. Because petitioners failed to disprove
respondent's determination on this issue, we sustain it. We also
sustain respondent's determination that petitioners are taxable
on the interest on these accounts. Petitioners had argued that
4 To the contrary, the record indicates that Mr. Chu
controlled the Liu accounts and that he had the ability to
dispose of the funds contained therein at will.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011