Eugene D. Lanier, Inc. - Page 34

                                       - 34 -                                         
          II.  Did the Laniers receive a constructive dividend as a result            
          of the Corporation's $13,000 transfer to their son's election               
          campaign committee?                                                         
               We now turn to whether the Laniers received a constructive             
          dividend in the amount of $13,000 on account of the Corporation's           
          transfer of that sum to Vance E. Lanier, Inc., on September 29,             
          1987.                                                                       
               Section 61(a)(7) provides that gross income includes                   
          dividends.  As mentioned previously, "dividend" is defined in               
          section 316(a) as a distribution of property made by a                      
          corporation to its shareholders out of its current and/or                   
          accumulated earnings and profits.                                           
               It is well established that expenditures made by a                     
          corporation for the personal benefit of its shareholders may                
          result in the receipt by the latter of constructive dividends.              
          Nicholls, North, Buse Co. v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 1225, 1238               
          (1971); Ashby v. Commissioner, 50 T.C. 409, 417 (1968).  The                
          classification of an expenditure as a constructive dividend is a            
          question of fact.  Hardin v. United States, 461 F.2d 865, 872               
          (5th Cir. 1972); Lengsfield v. Commissioner, 241 F.2d 508, 510              
          (5th Cir. 1957), affg. T.C. Memo. 1955-257.  In order to be so              
          classified, the benefit provided by the Corporation must                    
          primarily advance the shareholder's personal interest as opposed            
          to the business interests of the corporation.  Ireland v. United            
          States, 621 F.2d 731 (5th Cir. 1980).  However, the mere fact               
          that payments are not deductible by the corporation as a business           




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