- 12 - validity of the debt and show that the advances were loans rather than capital contributions. See Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111 (1933). We consider here whether petitioner’s advances to UPE created bona fide indebtedness or whether petitioner’s advances were contributions to capital representative of an equity stake in UPE. The determination of whether advances to a corporation have created bona fide indebtedness depends on whether there is an intention to create an unconditional obligation to repay the advances. See Raymond v. United States, supra at 190. Because bad debt deductions affect ordinary income and equity losses affect capital gain income, there appears to be a preference for bad debt deductions. There has been much litigation on this subject, and the courts consider various factors when deciding whether advances are debt or equity. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, to which this case is appealable, considers at least 13 nonexclusive factors principally relevant in determining whether advances to a corporation have created debt or equity. See Estate of Mixon v. United States, 464 F.2d 394, 402 (5th Cir. 1972).4 4 The Estate of Mixon factors include: (1) The names given to the certificates evidencing the indebtedness; (2) whether there is a fixed maturity date; (3) the source of the payments; (4) whether repayment is legally enforceable; (5) whether the creditor may participate in the debtor’s management; (6) whether the obligation is subordinate to other debts; (7) the intent of (continued...)Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011