Carl E. Jones and Elaine Y. Jones - Page 32

                                                -32-                                                  
            respondent determined that petitioner's basis in his stock was                            
            consumed by prior year distributions, and that Development was                            
            not indebted to petitioner.  (See supra Issue 1 for our holding                           
            on the prior year's distributions.)                                                       
                  Petitioner asserts that in 1989 he assumed Development's                            
            indebtedness to Carlsgate and the Carl E. Jones Trust No. 1 in                            
            the amounts of $82,132 and $153,847, respectively, and that in                            
            1990 he assumed Development's indebtedness to INI in the amount                           
            of $417,978.  Petitioner contends that his assumption of                                  
            Development's indebtedness provided him a basis for taking the                            
            losses, but that he had sufficient basis in his stock to deduct                           
            the losses without considering his basis in any indebtedness of                           
            Development to him.21                                                                     
                  A shareholder in an S corporation is required to decrease                           
            the basis in his S corporation stock (but not below zero) by,                             
            among other items, the shareholder's pro rata share of the S                              
            corporation's losses and deductions.  Sec. 1367(a)(2)(B) and (C).                         
                  Section 1368(d) provides that the adjustments to the                                
            shareholder's basis in his stock required by subsections (b) and                          

            21                                                                                        
                  Whether petitioner had sufficient basis in his stock in 1990                        
            and 1991 to deduct the losses, without considering his basis in                           
            Development's indebtedness to him, is a question of fact.  The                            
            record in this case is not sufficient for this Court to compute                           
            the basis petitioner had in his Development stock in 1990 and                             
            1991.  That basis must be ascertained by the parties in the Rule                          
            155 computation.  Thus, we limit our finding on this issue to                             
            whether petitioner had a basis in Development's indebtedness to                           
            him.                                                                                      





Page:  Previous  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011