- 316 - Seventh, Kanter's reporting of the kickback moneys on the returns of IRA and Holding Co. was designed to conceal the scheme, and is another strong indication of Kanter's fraud. See Lang v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1961-134, where the reporting of income from property beneficially owned by the taxpayer on the returns of family members was held to be fraudulent. It is clear that Kanter used the sham corporations to give the appearance that the kickback income was earned by them, rather than Ballard, Lisle, and himself, and that there was no tax due by the corporations because there were claimed losses sufficient to offset the income. Moneys were distributed from IRA and Holding Co. at Kanter's direction to other entities that were created to conceal further the true nature of the payments. Three of those entities, TMT, Carlco, and BWK Inc., were controlled respectively by Ballard, Lisle, and Kanter, and were the repositories of the kickback moneys distributed from IRA. Eighth, Kanter routinely used the various conduit entities as nominees, placing money and property in the names of the entities to conceal the transactions. In fact, when it was convenient, he would assert that the entity held an asset merely as nominee. Ninth, Kanter created phony loans to disguise the distributions of the income to himself and others and to evade the income tax due on the income. He later arranged for sales ofPage: Previous 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011