Nestle Holdings, Inc. - Page 8




                                                - 8 -                                                  
            Appeals affirmed this Court’s holding that petitioner had to                               
            recognize capital gains on the sale of the Carnation assets but                            
            reversed and remanded the Court’s 1995 opinion with regard to the                          
            valuation of the Carnation assets.                                                         
            Remand to the Tax Court and 1999 Stipulation                                               
                  After the Court scheduled the case for a new trial, the                              
            parties reached a basis of settlement in 1999 as to the value of                           
            the Carnation assets (1999 stipulation).  The valuation dispute                            
            affected only the deficiency and overpayment determinations for                            
            the 1985 tax year.10  As part of the 1999 stipulation, the                                 
            parties described the deficiency and/or overpayment computation                            
            for the 1985 tax year in their Rule 155 computations.  The                                 
            parties agreed to the following:                                                           
                        1.  * * * The parties hereby stipulate that                                    
                  Carnation Company’s basis in the trademarks was                                      
                  $239,500,000 and that the capital gain upon the sale of                              
                  these trademarks to NSA shall be computed by reference                               
                  to the foregoing basis * * *.                                                        
                        2.  The parties’ stipulation in paragraph 1 of                                 
                  Petitioner’s basis in the trademarks is for the sole                                 
                  purpose of resolving the remaining disputed issue in                                 
                  this case and has no precedential value beyond                                       
                  determining Carnation Company’s basis in the trademarks                              
                  and goodwill/going concern value.                                                    

                        9(...continued)                                                                
            petitioner’s 1983 and 1984 tax accounts, respectively.  Those                              
            funds came from interest overpaid by petitioner for the years in                           
            issue.                                                                                     
                  10  The valuation of the Carnation assets affected the                               
            amount of capital gains petitioner had to recognize for the 1985                           
            tax year.                                                                                  





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011