- 26 - The proposed regulation recognizes that a loan may continue to be an enforceable obligation and continue to accrue interest after it is treated as a distribution under section 72(p). Nevertheless, under the proposed regulation, once the loan is treated as a distribution, it ceases to have the characteristics of a loan for section 72(p) purposes. Thus, unpaid interest that accrues after the date the loan is treated as a distribution is not treated as an additional distribution to the borrower. We note that a proposed regulation carries no more weight than a position advanced by the Commissioner on brief. See Hospital Corp. of Am. v. Commissioner, 109 T.C. 21, 53 n.40 (1997); KTA-Tator, Inc. v. Commissioner, 108 T.C. 100, 102-103 (1997); Frazee v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 554, 582 (1992); Zinniel v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 357, 369 (1987); F.W. Woolworth Co. v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 1233, 1265-1266 (1970). Nonetheless, we find that respondent's position in the proposed regulation makes more sense than the respondent's litigating position in this case. Respondent's litigating position is logically inconsistent to the extent that it continues to treat the loan asPage: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011