- 18 -
Commissioner, 730 F.2d 634, 638-639 (11th Cir. 1984); Estate of
Mixon v. United States, supra at 408. Gandy’s controller
testified that when petitioner made the advances in question,
Gandy’s debts far exceeded its equity.
This factor weighs toward equity.
9. Identity of Interests Between Creditor and Shareholder
If stockholders make advances in proportion to their stock
ownership, a capital contribution is indicated. See Estate of
Mixon v. United States, supra at 409. Petitioner argues that his
advances to Gandy’s were not proportional to his ownership
interests since he made all the advances and Gandy’s had other
shareholders. The only other shareholders, however, were
corporations that he and Philip wholly owned and of which
petitioner was the majority shareholder, thereby weakening if not
negating any significance otherwise accorded to a lack of
proportionality. See Slappey Drive Indus. Park v. United States,
561 F.2d 572, 584 (5th Cir. 1977) (“Because shareholding family
members were thus less likely to attribute major significance to
departures from strict equality in their positions, the instances
of disproportionate debt and equity holdings provide a much
weaker inference than they ordinarily would that the ostensible
debt was in fact what it purported to be”).
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011