- 9 - the three entities’ businesses. Moreover, the advances made by petitioner were completely dependent upon the success of startup companies, none of which had prior business history, security, assets, or other guaranties of repayment. And finally, petitioner’s sister corporations repaid only a small percentage of the advances. As we noted in Cerand I, some of the factors usually considered by lenders such as capitalization, risk, the availability of financing from outside sources, and the use to which advances are put can help to identify whether the transaction was within the realm of economic reality. “[T]he touchstone of economic reality is whether an outside lender would have made the payments in the same form and on the same terms.” Segel v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 816, 828 (1987). Here, petitioner accrued and reported a relatively small percentage of the interest that would have accrued if the advances were truly debt. No interest was paid to petitioner by the sister corporations. Instead, the accruals were rolled over annually into a note receivable. Even if the $175,662 of interest reported by petitioner had been paid to it by the sister corporations, the amount of interest that was accrued and reported does not comport with economic reality in the context of a creditor-debtor relationship.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011