- 28 -
and revg. in part 59 T.C. 231 (1972). The second factor compares
the employee’s compensation with that paid by similar companies
in similar industries for similar services. Elliotts, Inc. v.
Commissioner, supra at 1246; see sec. 1.162-7(b)(3), Income Tax
Regs. The third factor requires us to focus on EIC's size as
indicated by its sales, or capital value, the complexities of the
business, and the general economic conditions. Elliotts, Inc. v.
Commissioner, supra at 1246. The fourth factor considers whether
the relationship between the company and the employee whose
compensation is at issue might permit the company to disguise
nondeductible corporate distributions of income as compensation
deductible under section 162(a)(1). Id. A potential for such
abuse exists when the employee whose compensation is at issue is
the company's sole or controlling shareholder. Charles Schneider
& Co. v. Commissioner, 500 F.2d 148, 152-153 (8th Cir. 1974),
affg. T.C. Memo. 1973-130; sec. 1.162-7(b)(1), Income Tax Regs.
The fifth factor focuses on whether the compensation was paid
pursuant to a structured, formal, and consistently applied
program. Bonuses not paid pursuant to such plans are suspect.
Elliotts, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 1247; Nor-Cal Adjusters
v. Commissioner, 503 F.2d 359, 362 (9th Cir. 1974), affg. T.C.
Memo. 1971-200. In the notices of deficiency, respondent
determined that commissions of $901,428 paid to petitioner in
1989 and the $500,000 bonus paid to petitioner in 1990 were not
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011