- 8 -
a claimant of that claimant's claim for damage. Where a claimant
recovered from du Pont, it was expected that the assistance
payment that it had made to that claimant was to be deducted as
having been paid from any ultimate settlement or judgment.
Du Pont never required a claimant to repay an assistance
payment that it made to such claimant. Du Pont's Benlate res-
olution manager who was in charge of assistance payments and
certain other du Pont officials considered that du Pont had a
right to ask that an assistance payment be paid back to it. The
return of an assistance payment to du Pont was discussed by du
Pont officials, but they never sought a formal opinion from du
Pont's attorneys on the question.
Du Pont requested an opinion from its tax counsel as to
whether it was required to issue a Form 1099 to each claimant who
received an assistance payment and whether it could issue a Form
1099 to such a claimant. The response of du Pont's tax counsel
to each of those questions was no. Du Pont never issued a Form
1099 for the assistance payments that it made.
By letter dated November 20, 1991, Mr. Henry requested
$50,000 from du Pont in order to meet outstanding obligations.
That letter stated in pertinent part:
Having closed my business on October 7th, 1991, I have
had no income. Now it is time to arrange for the
proper disposal of the damaged plant material. In
order to restock my greenhouses, it is necessary to go
to Hawaii and Thailand to personally inspect any plants
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011