Alumax Inc. and Consolidated Subsidiaries - Page 61

                                       - 53 -                                         
          B.T.A. 906 (1937), and Rudolph Wurlitzer Co. v. Commissioner, 81            
          F.2d 971 (6th Cir. 1936), affg. 29 B.T.A. 443 (1933)), on which             
          both parties rely was whether the stock in question was voting              
          stock or nonvoting stock for purposes of the applicable consoli-            
          dation provisions.  Those cases did not even address how to                 
          measure the voting power possessed by different classes of voting           
          stock for purposes of those provisions.  The questions presented            
          in certain of the rulings on which both parties rely (viz, Rev.             
          Rul. 69-126, 1969-1 C.B. 218; I.T. 3896, 1948-1 C.B. 72) were               
          whether the stock in question was voting stock or nonvoting stock           
          for purposes of the applicable consolidation provisions and how             
          to measure the voting power possessed by different classes of               
          voting stock for purposes of those provisions.  One or both of              
          those issues also were involved in certain of the other rulings             
          on which petitioners rely (e.g., Rev. Rul. 71-83, 1971-1 C.B.               
          268; Priv. Ltr. Rul. 90-26-047 (Mar. 30, 1990); Priv. Ltr. Rul.             
          83-42-014 (July 10, 1983); Priv. Ltr. Rul. 82-21-112 (Feb. 26,              
          1982)).                                                                     
               None of the cases or rulings on which petitioners rely                 
          involved the facts presented in the instant case.  Nor does any             
          of them mandate that we adopt petitioners' espoused mechanical              
          test, let alone their application of that test, in determining in           
          the present case whether the Alumax class C common stock owned by           
          the Amax group stockholders satisfies the voting power require-             
          ment of section 1504(a)(1) and amended section 1504(a)(1)(B) and            




Page:  Previous  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011