Estate of Artemus D. Davis, Deceased, Robert D. Davis, Personal Representative - Page 30

                                       - 30 -                                         
          terminated if ADDI&C (1) had earnings and profits at the close of           
          each of 3 consecutive taxable years that had been accumulated               
          prior to the S corporation election, see sec. 1362(d)(3)(A) and             
          (B), and (2) had more than 25 percent of its gross receipts for             
          each of those taxable years from passive investment income, which           
          includes dividend income, see sec. 1362(d)(3)(A), (D)(i).                   
              Although we agree with Mr. Pratt that section 1362(d)(3)                
          could have caused an otherwise valid S corporation election by              
          ADDI&C to be terminated if ADDI&C were not to maintain its cattle           
          operations or engage in some other operating business, there are            
          no facts established by the record to indicate that as of the               
          valuation date ADDI&C intended to curtail or eliminate its cattle           
          operations.  Nonetheless, we agree with the other two reasons               
          advanced by Mr. Pratt in support of his view that as of the                 
          valuation date it was unlikely that ADDI&C would have converted to          
          an S corporation.  Based on the record before us, we reject                 
          respondent's unwarranted assumptions that ADDI&C could have                 
          avoided all of ADDI&C's built-in capital gains tax by having it             
          elect S corporation status and by not permitting it to sell any of          
          its assets for 10 years thereafter, and the record does not                 
          establish that there was any other way as of the valuation date by          
          which ADDI&C could have avoided all of such tax.                            
              We turn now to respondent's position in respondent’s opening            
          brief, which, as discussed above, we believe was contradicted by            
          the position in respondent’s answering brief.  The former position          




Page:  Previous  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011