- 10 - of the services performed by Gamesa to customize Gamesa’s products for U.S. markets, that product manufacturers do not customarily charge distributors directly for services similar to those performed by Gamesa, and therefore, that the funds petitioner transferred to Cremin and Rubbik did not constitute ordinary and necessary business expenses. We agree with respondent. The ordinary and necessary nature of the funds transferred by petitioner to Cremin and Rubbik and petitioner’s arguments in support thereof are not supported by the evidence. Petitioner’s argument assumes that Gamesa somehow received the benefit of the funds that petitioner transferred to Cremin and Rubbik. The facts indicate, however, that Gamesa did not receive any such benefit. Nor does the record indicate that the funds transferred to Cremin and Rubbik facilitated in any way petitioner’s qualification for gray market protection for Gamesa's products. With regard to the $2,293,626 in funds transferred to Cremin, the facts do not indicate that Cremin owned any rights to the “g” trademark when it entered into the alleged licensing agreement with petitioner. Petitioner’s expert’s opinion regarding the ownership of the “g” trademark was generally unpersuasive, not supported by the evidence, and not credible. Also, for the years in issue, Gamesa (not petitioner, not Cremin, and not Rubbik) was the registered U.S. owner of the “g”Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011