Glenn and Marion Peterson - Page 9

                                        - 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