-6-
petitioner’s investment and participation in the FoodSource
program.7 Respondent determined that the FoodSource program was an
abusive tax shelter.
Petitioner was one of a large number of persons nationwide who
had invested in the FoodSource program and claimed credits,
deductions, and losses with respect thereto, which respondent
disallowed. In order to resolve common issues, “test case
petitioners” were selected among the persons whose credits,
deductions, and losses had been disallowed by respondent and who
had petitioned this Court for a redetermination of that
disallowance. We rendered an opinion in the consolidated test
cases entitled Noonan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1986-449, affd.
without published opinion sub nom. Hillendahl v. Commissioner, 976
F.2d 737 (9th Cir. 1992).
Subsequent to our decisions in Noonan and the conclusion of
the appeal thereof, on August 7, 1989, petitioners and respondent
entered into a closing agreement (Form 906) regarding the credits,
deductions, and losses petitioners claimed on their 1979, 1980,
1982, and 1983 tax returns with respect to petitioner’s investment
and participation in the FoodSource program. In pertinent part,
the closing agreement states:
7 Petitioners claimed refunds for carrybacks to their
1979 through 1981 tax years, based upon the depreciation
deductions, interest expense, and investment tax credit as a
result of petitioner’s purchase of the container.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011