- 35 - Pecaris partnership agreement, petitioner had and continues to have a 25-percent profits and losses interest in the partnership. Thus, 25 percent of Pecaris' gain from its sale of its entire interest in the Mall must be allocated to petitioner under the partnership allocation rules, regardless of what was distributed to him in cash. United States v. Basye, supra at 453 ("it is axiomatic that each partner must pay taxes on his distributive share of the partnership's income without regard to whether that amount is actually distributed to him"); Curtis v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-344 (few principles of partnership taxation are more firmly established than the notion that, no matter the reason for nondistribution, each partner must pay taxes on his distributive share). Petitioners also argue that any allocation to petitioner of gain from the sale of the Mall would not have "substantial economic effect" under section 704(b) and the regulations thereunder. Petitioner's argument is premised on the conclusion we've already rejected, that the Mall transaction, insofar as petitioner is concerned, amounted to a distribution to him by Pecaris of an undivided interest in the Mall that he contributed to Coastal. The inclusion of the $700,000 credit in the amount realized by and recognized to Pecaris and distributed by Pecaris to petitioner, supports our conclusion that the allocation of a distributive share of the Pecaris gain to petitioner hasPage: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011