- 365 - did not know who possessed the books and records. When respondent served a subpoena on Kanter for records of BRT, Kanter produced various tax returns but did not produce requested records related to the basis of assets. Weisgal testified that he had a 3-year retention policy except that records related to basis were kept until the applicable asset was sold. However, neither Kanter nor Weisgal produced records related to basis that were sought by respondent even though, under Weisgal's stated policy, such records should have been available. The fact that Weisgal did not maintain the books and records of BRT and the fact that Kanter, rather than Weisgal, produced records is also indicative of Kanter's control over BRT. Kanter received loans from BRT. He owed $287,030 and $1,311,430 to BRT in 1987 and 1989, respectively. Kanter did not establish that these loans were for adequate consideration, that the loans were adequately secured or that the loans were ever repaid. He also indirectly borrowed money from BRT by borrowing money from IRA and Holding Co., the stock of which corporations was in whole or in part owned by BRT. Section 674(a) provides that the grantor of a trust will be treated as the owner of any portion of the trust whose income, without the approval of an adverse party, is subject to a power of disposition, exercisable by the grantor or a nonadverse party, or both, without the approval or consent of any adverse party.Page: Previous 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011