- 148 - shareholders of MANV. Although the dividends in form passed through Manver, the ultimate payees were the MANV shareholders. Accordingly, the payments are subject to withholding tax, and respondent's determination is sustained. C. MDT and MSI Payments to Manver in March 1988 Petitioners argue that the March 1988 transactions in connection with the up-front royalty payments were not shams, and the cash payments should be recognized. Petitioners further argue that there is no withholding applicable because the significant event for withholding tax purposes was the lump-sum payment in December 1987. Respondent contends that the up-front payments were illusory and shams, and, therefore, those payments were not subject to withholding. Respondent asserts that the withholding would apply later when petitioners repatriated the funds as dividends through the guise of loan payments. We concluded previously that the transactions in connection with the up-front royalty payments were shams that were entered into solely for tax-avoidance purposes. We agree with respondent that the payments were illusory and are not subject to withholding. We also agree that the amounts paid out as loan payments on the transactions were dividends and were subject to withholding when the payments were made. Accordingly, respondent's determination is sustained.Page: Previous 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011