Saba Partnership, Brunswick Corporation, Tax Matters Partnership - Page 121




                                       - 87 -                                         
         partnership; (3) partnership items would be reallocated to                   
         Brunswick (90 percent) and Skokie (10 percent); and (4)                      
         Brunswick's basis in the 4 LIBOR notes was $17,458,827.  In                  
         addition, respondent disallowed certain deductions.  First,                  
         respondent disallowed $25,000 of a $50,823 deduction that                    
         Otrabanda had reported for amounts paid to N.V. Fides during the             
         taxable year ended June 21, 1991.  The $25,000 item was labeled              
         "incorporation fee".  In addition, respondent disallowed a                   
         deduction of $72,996 that Otrabanda had reported for amounts paid            
         to Cravath, Swaine & Moore during the taxable year ended June 21,            
         1991.  Respondent determined that the disallowed amounts had not             
         been substantiated and that petitioner had failed to demonstrate             
         that the amounts represented ordinary and necessary business                 
         expenses.                                                                    
              Respondent made several alternative determinations in the               
         event the Court were to recognize Otrabanda as a partnership for             
         Federal income tax purposes.  Respondent determined in pertinent             
         part:  (1) No gain or loss would be recognized on the purchase               
         and sale of the IBJ CDs because the transactions lacked economic             
         substance; and (2) Otrabanda’s basis in the LIBOR notes                      
         distributed to Brunswick was $17,458,827.                                    
                                       OPINION                                        
              The central issue in these cases is whether the                         
         partnerships' CINS transactions should be disregarded for Federal            






Page:  Previous  77  78  79  80  81  82  83  84  85  86  87  88  89  90  91  92  93  94  95  96  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011