- 9 -
not what it is called, how many or how few own it, or how they
regard it. Carver v. United States, supra at 237.
Hooper and Chamblee, among others, created petitioner for
their joint advantage. Real and substantial benefits inured to
petitioner's shareholders, including the privilege of limited
liability, the opportunity to continue petitioner's existence in
the event of a shareholder's death or withdrawal, the ability of
petitioner to hold title to and sell property, and the ability of
each individual shareholder to transfer his ownership interest in
petitioner.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, taxpayers are free to
arrange their affairs as they choose; however, having made that
choice, they must accept the resulting tax consequences, whether
fully contemplated or not. See Commissioner v. National Alfalfa
Dehydrating & Milling Co., 417 U.S. 134, 149 (1974). Because
taxpayers may select the form in which they do business, the
choice of entity is generally binding. Crouch v. United States,
692 F.2d 97, 99 (10th Cir. 1982); see also Bradley v. United
States, 730 F.2d 718, 720 (11th Cir. 1984). Whatever the purpose
may have been in choosing to incorporate petitioner, so long as
that purpose is the equivalent of business activity or is
followed by the corporation's carrying on business, the
corporation remains a separate taxable entity. See Moline
Properties Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 438-439. We hold that
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011