- 9 -
1972). The existence of a note, however, is not in and of itself
conclusive. An unsecured note, with no payments made thereon,
weighs towards equity. See Stinnett’s Pontiac Serv., Inc. v.
Commissioner, 730 F.2d 634 (11th Cir. 1984), affg. T.C. Memo.
1982-314; Estate of Van Anda v. Commissioner, 12 T.C. 1158, 1162
(1949), affd. per curiam 192 F.2d 391 (2d Cir. 1951).
Here, notes were signed, but they were not signed until the
end of the fiscal year in which funds had been advanced.
Further, the notes were executed in amounts that were less than
the amount that had been advanced. Furthermore, the evidence
shows that no payments were ever made on these unsecured
advances. When a transaction involves a closely held
corporation, the forms and labels assigned to a transaction may
mean little due to the parties’ ability to mold the transaction
to their will. See Anchor Natl. Life Ins. Co. v. Commissioner,
93 T.C. 382, 407 (1989). For these reasons, we find that the
notes have only limited probative value in our evaluation of
whether the advances were bona fide indebtedness.
2. Presence or Absence of Fixed Maturity Date and Schedule of
Payments
Here, no schedule of payments or due date was established.
Petitioners’ claim that demand notes weigh in their favor, but
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011