- 21 -
submit cogent evidence to overcome the admission on the corporate
returns that Mid-Nebraska continued to own the loans to
shareholder accounts after York acquired Mid-Nebraska’s business.
Petitioners have not proven that the loans to shareholder
accounts did not exist when Mid-Nebraska ceased business.
Accordingly, we sustain respondent’s determination that
petitioners realized capital gain during 1993 from a liquidation
distribution petitioner received from Mid-Nebraska when it was
statutorily dissolved in that year.
Although petitioners claim to have made additional capital
contributions to Mid-Nebraska between February 1982 and September
8, 1992, they have failed to establish that they are entitled to
a greater basis for petitioner’s stock than the amount allowed by
respondent. Accordingly, we hold that petitioner’s basis in the
Mid-Nebraska stock was $33,175 when the corporation was
dissolved.
We have carefully considered all remaining arguments made by
the parties for a result contrary to that expressed herein,4 and,
to the extent not discussed above, find them to be irrelevant or
without merit.
4On brief, petitioners do not address the inclusion or
accuracy of the net depreciable assets or the accounts payable
amounts shown above. Accordingly, we treat those amounts as
conceded by petitioners. See Rule 151(e)(4) and (5); Petzoldt v.
Commissioner, 92 T.C. 661, 683 (1989); Money v. Commissioner, 89
T.C. 46, 48 (1987).
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011