- 9 -9 obvious from our findings of fact that the record herein is totally lacking in evidence sufficient to support petitioners' contention that the guarantee and the payment thereon were anything but capital in nature. The parties have stipulated that Dutchess was undercapitalized, and the record is devoid of any evidence as to the amount that any of the shareholders invested in Dutchess in addition to the guarantee of the Dutchess' indebtedness. Glenn Peterson guaranteed indebtedness used to purchase apples sold by Dutchess to its principal customers. Thus the indebtedness was an essential element in financing Dutchess' operations. We think the approach of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in dealing with a comparable situation in Plantation Patterns, Inc. v. Commissioner, 462 F.2d at 722-723, is particularly applicable herein: The guarantee enabled Mr. Jemison to put a minimum amount of cash into New Plantation immediately, and to avoid any further cash investment in the corporation unless and until it should fall on hard times. * * * we think that the result is that Mr. Jemison's guarantee simply amounted to a covert way of putting his money "at the risk of the business". Stated differently, the guarantee enabled Mr. Jemison to create borrowing power for the corporation which normally would have existed only through the presence of more adequate capitalization of New Plantation. Indeed this approach coincides with the analysis which this Court applied in disposing of three cases involving facts very similar to those involved here, namely, Titmas v. Commissioner, T.C.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011