- 31 -
fore, we must give appropriate weight to the regulations in
interpreting the statute. Commissioner v. South Texas Lumber
Co., 333 U.S. 496 (1948).
We have found no other cases that have analyzed the founda-
tion manager excise tax under section 4941(a)(2). However, the
Tax Court analyzed the foundation manager excise tax under
section 4945(a)(2) in Thorne v. Commissioner, 99 T.C. 67 (1992).
These statutes were both enacted as part of the chapter 42
reforms of the 1969 Act, and the statutes, as well as the
respective regulations promulgated thereunder, contain nearly
identical language. Thus, the analysis contained in Thorne v.
Commissioner, supra, is highly probative in interpreting the
excise tax of section 4941(a)(2). We concluded in Thorne v.
Commissioner, supra at 105, that the threshold determination
under the knowledge requirement is ascertaining the extent of the
taxpayer's factual knowledge concerning the expenditures and not
whether the taxpayer actually knew the expenditures were prohib-
ited under the statute.
The parties have stipulated that the foundation managers
were aware both that GMC was a disqualified person vis-a-vis the
Museum, and that some transactions between a private foundation
and a disqualified person are considered "self-dealing" under
section 4941(d). Further, the parties have agreed that the
foundation managers were aware self-dealing is defined as, inter
alia, a direct furnishing of goods, services, or facilities
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011