Paul G. Gubbini - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
          shareholder to his corporation may qualify as a business bad debt           
          if the shareholder was engaged in the business of promoting,                
          organizing, financing, and selling corporations.  Deely v.                  
          Commissioner, supra at 1092.  If a shareholder is only an                   
          investor, the debt will be treated as a nonbusiness bad debt                
          because the management of one’s investments does not constitute a           
          trade or business.  Id.  In Whipple v. Commissioner, 373 U.S.               
          193, 202-203 (1963), the Supreme Court set forth the following              
          guidelines for deciding the question:                                       
               Devoting one’s time and energies to the affairs of a                   
               corporation is not of itself, and without more, a trade                
               or business of the person so engaged.  Though such                     
               activities may produce income, profit or gain in the                   
               form of dividends or enhancement in the value of an                    
               investment, this return is distinctive to the process                  
               of investing and is generated by the successful                        
               operation of the corporation’s business as                             
               distinguished from the trade or business of the                        
               taxpayer himself.  When the only return is that of an                  
               investor, the taxpayer has not satisfied his burden of                 
               demonstrating that he is engaged in a trade or business                
               since investing is not a trade or business and the                     
               return to the taxpayer, though substantially the                       
               product of his services, legally arises not from his                   
               own trade or business but from that of the corporation.                
               *  *  *                                                                
                    If full-time service to one corporation does not                  
               alone amount to a trade or business, which it does not,                
               it is difficult to understand how the same service to                  
               many corporations would suffice.  To be sure, the                      
               presence of more than one corporation might lend                       
               support to a finding that the taxpayer was engaged in a                
               regular course of promoting corporations for a fee or                  
               commission * * * or for a profit on their sale * * *,                  
               but in such cases there is compensation other than the                 
               normal investor’s return, income received directly for                 
               his own services rather than indirectly through the                    
               corporate enterprise * * *                                             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011