- 7 - of the ingredients of income--capital or services." Commissioner v. Culbertson, supra at 740. Whether parties have formed a partnership is a question of fact, and while all circumstances are to be considered, the essential question is whether the parties intended to, and did in fact, join together for the present conduct of an undertaking or enterprise. Luna v. Commissioner, 42 T.C. 1067, 1077 (1964); Gabriel v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-524; see also Commissioner v. Tower, supra at 287. In deciding whether two or more persons have formed a partnership, the Supreme Court has stated: The question is not whether the services or capital contributed by a partner are of sufficient importance to meet some objective standard * * * but whether, considering all the facts--the agreement, the conduct of the parties in execution of its provisions, their statements, the testimony of disinterested persons, the relationship of the parties, their respective abilities and capital contributions, the actual control of income and the purposes for which it is used, and any other facts throwing light on their true intent--the parties in good faith and acting with a business purpose intended to join together in the present conduct of the enterprise. * * * [Commissioner v. Culbertson, supra at 742.] See also Luna v. Commissioner, supra at 1077-1078. Recognition of a partnership for Federal tax purposes also requires that the parties conduct some business activity. See Madison Gas & Elec. Co. v. Commissioner, 633 F.2d 512, 514-517 (7th Cir. 1980), affg. 72 T.C. 521 (1979); Frazell v. Commissioner, supra at 1412. While it is well settled that merePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011