- 9 -
Petitioners assert that material issues of fact regarding
the termination of petitioner's status as a Life Care partner
remain in dispute and that the rule in Commissioner v. Danielson,
supra, is not applicable under the circumstances presented.
For Federal tax purposes, the terms "partnership" and
"partner" are defined in section 7701(a)(2) as follows:
(2) Partnership and partner.--The term
"partnership" includes a syndicate, group, pool, joint
venture, or other unincorporated organization, through
or by means of which any business, financial operation,
or venture is carried on, and which is not, within the
meaning of this title, a trust or estate or a
corporation; and the term "partner" includes a member
in such a syndicate, group, pool, joint venture, or
organization.
See sec. 761(a). The existence or nonexistence of a partnership
under State law is not determinative for Federal tax purposes.
Commissioner v. Tower, 327 U.S. 280, 287 (1946); Frazell v.
Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1405, 1412 (1987); Hensel Phelps
Construction Co. v. Commissioner, 74 T.C. 939, 947-948 (1980),
affd. 703 F.2d 485 (10th Cir. 1983).
In Commissioner v. Culbertson, 337 U.S. 733, 742 (1949), the
Supreme Court held that, in determining whether a partnership has
been formed for tax purposes, the proper inquiry is:
(...continued)
Coleman v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 178, 202 n.17 (1986), affd.
without published opinion 833 F.2d 303 (3d Cir. 1987), we would
be obliged to follow the holding of Bradley v. United States, 730
F.2d 718 (11th Cir. 1984), if that case were directly on point.
Golsen v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 742, 756-757 (1970), affd. 445
F.2d 985 (10th Cir. 1971).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011