- 14 - For all issues in this case except the penalty under section 6673, respondent's determination is presumed correct, and petitioners bear the burden of proving it wrong. See Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Where an entity is created that has no real economic effect and which affects no cognizable economic relationship, the substance of a transaction involving the entity will control over its form. See Zmuda v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 714, 720 (1982), affd. 731 F.2d 1417 (9th Cir. 1984); Markosian v. Commissioner, 73 T.C. 1235, 1241 (1980). Regarding economic substance, we recently stated: "The doctrine of economic substance becomes applicable, and a judicial remedy is warranted, where a taxpayer seeks to claim tax benefits, unintended by Congress, by means of transactions that serve no economic purpose other than tax savings." ACM Partnership v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-115, affd. in part, revd. on other grounds in part, dismissed in part and remd. in part 157 F.3d 231 (1998). We find such lack of economic purpose in this case. More specifically, we have held a trust is not recognized for tax purposes if it has no economic substance apart from tax considerations. See Markosian v. Commissioner, supra at 1244- 1245. These principles apply even though an entity may have been properly formed and may have had a separate existence under applicable local law. See Zmuda v. Commissioner, supra at 720.Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011