- 9 -
With regard to whether a creditor (namely, respondent
herein) had a claim against Associates PC before the transfer
date, Hanna PC argues that respondent's notice of deficiency to
Associates PC was untimely and therefore that respondent did not
have a valid timely claim for a $31,450 Federal income tax
deficiency against Associates PC.
The record indicates that Associates PC filed its Federal
income tax return for 1993 on March 15, 1994, and that respondent
mailed the notice of deficiency to Associates PC on February 26,
1997. Under section 6501(a), respondent's notice of deficiency
is timely. We conclude that respondent had a timely claim of
$31,450 against Associates PC before the transfer date.6
In order to analyze the third element of UFTA section
24.006(a) (namely, whether Associates PC did not receive
reasonably equivalent value for the transfer of assets to Hanna
PC), we compare the amount of the assets Associates PC
transferred to Hanna PC with the amount of the assets or rights,
if any, that Associates PC received from Hanna PC. See UFTA sec.
24.004; In re Sullivan, 161 Bankr. 776, 781 (Bankr. N.D. Tex.
1993). In determining the amount of the assets or rights
received by Associates PC, we treat (as do the parties herein)
6 Under UFTA sec. 24.002(3), a claim is “a right to payment or
property, whether or not the right is reduced to judgment,
liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured,
disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.”
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011