- 38 -
v. Commissioner, supra at 1016. Accordingly, we find that the
payments to petitioner made in accordance with the partnership
agreements were guaranteed payments.
We now address petitioner's argument that the payments he
received are not income because they are repayments of loans from
petitioner to the partnerships. Whether a transaction is a loan
for Federal income tax purposes is a question of fact. The
following factors are considered in determining whether a loan is
bona fide: (1) The existence of a sum certain; (2) the
likelihood of repayment; (3) a definite date of repayment; and
(4) the manner of repayment. Seay v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1992-254; Mangham v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1980-280.
Petitioner's argument that the payments represent the
repayment of loans from petitioner to the partnerships is not
supported by the record. As indicated, petitioner recorded the
transfer of funds to and from the partnerships on the ledgers.
The ledgers do not reflect that petitioner transferred funds to
the partnerships as reflected on his GAP sheets. In addition,
there are no documents in the record, other than the GAP sheets,
setting forth the terms of the purported loans, terms of
repayment, collateral, etc. Some of the ledgers reflect negative
yearend balances, indicating that petitioner withdrew more funds
Page: Previous 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011