J.J. Zand - Page 122

                                        - 201 -                                       

          had unfettered access to the account; his name was on the                   
          account; and he directed the activities of the account.                     
          Similarly, in 1976 petitioner's FNCB account number 245925 earned           
          interest in the amount of �27,466.39, the equivalent of                     
          $44,127.50.  He owned the account, he was a signatory, and he had           
          unfettered access to the account.  Petitioner did not show that             
          his accounts had any restriction or were in any way controlled by           
          any person other than himself.  He asserted through his testimony           
          and the testimony of other witnesses that he considered the                 
          London accounts in his name to be those of Diesel Power.                    
          However, in 1974 and 1975 Diesel Power also had an FNCB account             
          in London as well as FNCB accounts in Geneva, Switzerland.                  
          According to the testimony, all Diesel Power officers were                  
          signatories to the Diesel Power accounts.  Petitioner's accounts            
          were separate.  We hold, pursuant to section 61, that the                   
          interest income on such accounts is taxable to petitioner.  See             
          Marcus v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-234.                                
               In 1974, 1975, and 1976 the bank account or time deposits in           
          the name of WHIP at the Barclays Bank Bahamas also earned                   
          interest in the respective amounts of $25,025, $29,338.94, and              
          $16,998.06.  As set forth in our findings of fact, WHIP was                 
          simply a repository for the receipt of commissions earned from              
          Lockheed for petitioner's performance of services.  Petitioner              
          was the sole shareholder of WHIP and exercised full control over            





Page:  Previous  191  192  193  194  195  196  197  198  199  200  201  202  203  204  205  206  207  208  209  210  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011