Forest L. Buckmaster - Page 12

                                                - 12 -                                                   
            residence.  Although it is true that petitioner ostensibly made                              
            monthly "rent" payments to Ideal Management, Ideal Management                                
            applied these payments mainly to the residence's mortgage,                                   
            property taxes, and other expenses.  Thus, we see clearly that                               
            petitioner stood in exactly the same spot with respect to his                                
            assets before and after their transfer to Ideal Management.  We                              
            find that the first factor points to a sham.                                                 
                  We find likewise with respect to the second factor; i.e.,                              
            Ideal Management lacked a bona fide independent trustee.                                     
            Contrary to the assertions of petitioner and R. Richard Evans,                               
            the named trustee of Ideal Management during 1992, Mr. Evans                                 
            could not prevent petitioner from using Ideal Management's                                   
            property for his own purposes.4  Petitioner had signature                                    
            authority over the Ideal Management account, which meant that he                             
            had access to the funds contained therein.  Petitioner also could                            
            not be removed from his position as Ideal Management's manager                               
            without 30 days' notice, which, in turn, gave petitioner                                     
            perpetual control of Ideal Management.  See United States v.                                 
            Scott, supra at 1571.  Petitioner's use of the residence and the                             
            tools of his trade also were free from restraint.                                            
                  As to the third factor, we find no probative evidence in the                           
            record to indicate that petitioner transferred an economic                                   
            interest to a third party when he transferred his assets to Ideal                            

                  4 Mr. Evans testified on behalf of petitioner.  We give his                            
            testimony little weight.  Among other things, we note that Mr.                               
            Evans was vague and evasive during his testimony.                                            

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011