Sandy Kay Jones and Clint Joseph Jones - Page 4

                                        - 4 -                                         

          distributors.  These lower level distributors are collectively              
          referred to as petitioner's down-line distributors.                         
               Petitioner sells products directly to his customers at the             
          regular retail price, and he sells products to his distributors             
          at a discounted price.  Petitioner is paid a commission on the              
          sales he makes directly to his customers, and he is paid a                  
          commission, called a "royalty" by the companies,2 on the sales              
          made by his first-level distributors.  Once a distributor sells a           
          certain dollar value of products, the distributor becomes a                 
          "breakaway distributor".  The breakaway distributor buys products           
          directly from the company, rather than from petitioner.  Although           
          the breakaway distributor is no longer under the supervision of             
          petitioner and no longer purchases the company's products through           
          petitioner, petitioner receives royalty payments from the company           
          on the purchases made by the breakaway distributor.                         
               Petitioner's first-level distributor, who recruits a second-           
          level distributor, receives a royalty for all of the sales by               
          that second-level distributor.  Petitioner also receives a                  
          royalty for each sale by the second-level distributor.  The                 
          number of distributor levels below petitioner for which he                  

               2  The companies refer to these payments as "royalties".  We           
          use this word in describing the payments for convenience without            
          accepting this categorization in a legal context.  Yoakum v.                
          Commissioner, 82 T.C. 128, 140 (1984) (the language used may                
          indicate the form of the payment but does not control the                   
          character).                                                                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011