-38- pay rent for a hall to conduct its bingo games and contends that, under Ohio law, the $250 per session that it paid was a reasonable rent. We agree with respondent. An organization’s payment of reasonable rent to an insider for the organization’s use of the insider’s property would not constitute inurement of net earnings but payment of an excessive amount in the form of rent would. Founding Church of Scientology v. United States, 188 Ct. Cl. 490, 412 F.2d 1197, 1202 (1969); Texas Trade School v. Commissioner, 272 F.2d 168, 169 (5th Cir. 1959), affg. 30 T.C. 642, 647 (1958).12 Whether the payment in question exceeds a reasonable rental is a question of fact. Harmon City, Inc. v. United States, 733 F.2d 1381, 1385 (10th Cir. 1984); Southeastern Canteen Co. v. Commissioner, 410 F.2d 615, 619 (6th Cir. 1969), affg. on this issue and revg. on another issue T.C. Memo. 1967-183. During petitioner’s fiscal 1984 and part of fiscal 1985 petitioner paid $250 per bingo session to P&R to rent the Center for bingo fundraising. We have held that Zeve and Popovic are insiders, in particular with regard to petitioner’s bingo fundraising activities. Zeve and Popovic each owned 20 percent of P&R. If petitioner was paying more than reasonable rent to 12 To the same effect is Bramson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1986-273.Page: Previous 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011