- 7 -
102 F.3d 1088 (10th Cir. 1996). In this case, Texas law controls
whether Hanna PC is to be liable for the transferor's tax
liability (namely, whether the transfer from Associates PC to
Hanna PC is to be regarded as a fraudulent transfer under the
Texas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA)). UFTA Tex. Bus. &
Com. Code Ann. secs. 24.001 to 24.012 (West 1987 & Supp. 1999);
see Commissioner v. Stern, supra at 45; Hagaman v. Commissioner,
100 T.C. 180, 183 (1993). Respondent bears the burden of proof
to show that Hanna PC is liable as a transferee, but not to show
that Associates PC was liable for the tax. See sec. 6902(a);
Rule 142(d).
Under UFTA section 24.006(a), it is provided that a
transferor engages in a transfer that is fraudulent as to a
creditor if: (1) The transferor makes a transfer to a
transferee, (2) the creditor has a claim against the transferor
before the transfer is made, (3) the transferor makes the
transfer without receiving reasonably equivalent value, and (4)
the transferor is insolvent at the time of the transfer or is
rendered insolvent as a result of the transfer.4
4 The language of sec. 24.006(a) of the Texas Uniform
Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA), Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Ann.
(West 1987), is provided below:
A transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor is
fraudulent as to a creditor whose claim arose before
the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred if
the debtor made the transfer or incurred the obligation
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011