- 6 - prospects good, and petitioner anticipated the possible private or public sale of the stock of EPL. In 1988, no appraisals relating to the value of EPL as a business were obtained. The evidence does not indicate that petitioner ever made demand on EPL for repayment of his purported loans to EPL, nor does the evidence indicate that petitioner ever undertook steps to otherwise collect from EPL the purported loans. In 1988, in anticipation of, among other things, a possible sale of EPL’s stock and in an effort to enhance the financial statements of EPL, petitioner went through the exercise of “forgiving” $1.6 million in purported debt of EPL to petitioner relating to funds that petitioner over the years had transferred to EPL. After 1988, EPL continued to operate as a business. Petitioner and his son attempted to sell the stock of EPL in a public offering, and petitioner continued to transfer funds to EPL. In 1989, 1990, and 1991, petitioner transferred to EPL funds totaling $616,169, and petitioner received from EPL funds totaling $573,282. The evidence does not indicate the existence of any promissory notes or other debt instruments relating to the funds that petitioner, after 1988, transferred to EPL. In 1989, in seeking outside investment capital, a new comprehensive business plan for EPL was adopted.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011