California Marine Cleaning, Inc. - Page 7

                                          7                                           
          petitioner filed a section 534(c) statement or requested an                 
          Appeals Office conference.                                                  
          D.   Petitioner's Section 534(c) Statement                                  
               On July 12, 1996, petitioner filed a timely section 534(c)             
          statement identifying the grounds on which it relied to establish           
          that it did not unreasonably accumulate earnings.  Petitioner               
          asserted that it had 11 grounds to accumulate earnings:  (1) To             
          provide a reserve for Federal income tax and interest; (2) to               
          provide working capital; (3) to expand to additional port cities;           
          (4) to replace equipment; (5) to provide loans to customers or              
          suppliers; (6) to meet competition; (7) to provide insurance; (8)           
          to provide a litigation reserve; (9) to prepare for unsettled               
          business conditions; (10) to make pension and profit sharing plan           
          contributions; and (11) to respond to the possible loss of its              
          principal customer, the U.S. Navy.                                          
               Petitioner filed its petition in this case on September 9,             
          1996.  On April 9, 1997, this case was calendared for trial at              
          the September 15, 1997, session of this Court at San Diego,                 
          California.                                                                 
               On April 24, 1997, respondent filed a motion for a ruling              
          that petitioner's section 534(c) statement was insufficient to              
          shift the burden of proof to respondent.  On July 22, 1997, we              
          held that petitioner's section 534(c) statement did not contain             
          enough facts to shift the burden of proof to respondent.                    






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011