- 12 - the advances as advertising or promotional expenses of Dr. Rosenberg’s plastic surgery practice. A. Whether Petitioners' Advances to Cabana Boy Were Debt or Equity Petitioners contend that their advances to Cabana Boy were loans that became worthless in the years in issue. Respondent contends that the claimed advances were equity. A taxpayer may deduct a bona fide debt that becomes worthless in the taxable year. See sec. 166(a)(1). Taxpayers generally bear the burden of proving that the transfers by the taxpayers to the corporations were loans and not equity. See Rule 142(a); Dixie Dairies Corp. v. Commissioner, 74 T.C. 476, 493 (1980). The question of whether a transfer of funds to a closely held corporation is debt or equity must be decided based on all the relevant facts and circumstances. We consider various factors in deciding whether a loan is bona fide. See Estate of Mixon v. United States, 464 F.2d 394, 402 (5th Cir. 1972). No single factor controls. See John Kelley Co. v. Commissioner, 326 U.S. 521, 530 (1946); Fin Hay Realty Co. v. United States, 398 F.2d 694, 697 (3d Cir. 1968). We next apply these factors to this case. 1. Name Given to the Certificate Evidencing the Transfer of Funds The issuance of a stock certificate in exchange for an advance suggests that the advance is equity, and the issuance ofPage: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011