-15-
follows that Prindle is not liable for the addition to tax for
failure to file tax returns under section 6651 for 1992 and 1993.
C. Welfare Benefit Plan Deduction
Petitioners contend that they may deduct $100,000 as their
contribution to a qualified welfare benefit fund under section
419(a) and (g)(1) for 1992. We disagree.
A welfare benefit fund is any fund which is part of a plan
of an employer through which the employer provides benefits to
employees or their beneficiaries. Sec. 419(e). If the
requirements of section 162 or section 212 are otherwise met, a
taxpayer employer may deduct contributions to a welfare benefit
fund in the year in which the taxpayer employer paid the
contributions to the extent of the welfare benefit fund's
qualified cost for that year. Sec. 419(b).
Petitioners have not convinced us that they paid $100,000,
or any other amount, to a qualified welfare benefit fund in 1992.
Mr. Fox testified that he sent a certified cashier's check for
$15,000 to Employers Trust 2000. He testified that he sent
4(...continued)
other contentions that Prindle is not a valid trust under
Washington State law because of insufficient evidence showing
that Mr. and Mrs. Fox actually transferred assets to Prindle or
that Prindle is a grantor trust which should be taxed as a
corporation if it an otherwise valid entity. We also need not
decide petitioners' contention that the Oxyfresh income stream is
assignable, because even if it were, Prindle is not recognized
for Federal tax purposes.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011