- 4 - the liquidating distribution (i.e., $393,071 of property received, a $495,401 stock basis, and a resulting capital loss of $102,330). On its 1988 return, MOC reported an $82,189 abandonment loss relating to the wave pool equipment. Mr. Buda, MOC's sole shareholder, reported this loss on his 1988 return. OPINION I. Nature and Value of the Leasehold Interest The amount realized on liquidation of MOC is in dispute. More specifically, the parties disagree about the nature and value of the leasehold interest in 5 Acre that Mr. Buda received. Respondent contends that the leasehold interest in 5 Acre included the right to use, and receive all income from, the property. Petitioners contend that MOC subleased 5 Acre to Mr. Buda for $30,000 per year and that, on liquidation, Mr. Buda received the right to the $30,000 annual payments. The nature of the leasehold interest received by Mr. Buda, therefore, turns on whether MOC subleased 5 Acre. Petitioners assert that MOC entered into an oral sublease with its sole shareholder, Mr. Buda. Mr. Buda and Daniel Cooper, Mr. Buda's accountant, testified. Their testimony relating to the terms of the oral sublease was vague and contradictory. Moreover, neither witness could offer the Court any explanation why this sublease was not in writing, while all other agreements relating to 5 Acre were in writing (i.e., Mr. Buda's lease with the Kings, his assignment of that lease to B & M, and B & M's sublease to MOC). Furthermore, the record controvertsPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011