- 28 -
income because Landtrak owned the stock Mr. Comey had
reregistered in its name.9
In short, Mr. Comey, like Mrs. Comey, claims that Landtrak
was the owner for tax purposes of securities giving rise to the
items of income in question. However, Mr. Comey’s explanation of
how Landtrak became the owner of his securities (sometimes
referred to hereinafter as Mr. Comey’s portfolio) is more
complicated than Mrs. Comey’s explanation of how Landtrak became
the owner of her Capital Fund shares.
Mr. Comey claims that he originally transferred ownership of
his stock portfolio to Lumatron Corporation in 1978. Mr. Comey
further claims that ownership of his portfolio then effectively
passed to Landtrak in 1987 or 1988, when he assertedly sold his
Lumatron stock to Landtrak.
For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that Mr. Comey
never transferred ownership of his portfolio to Lumatron.
9 We note that respondent also issued a statutory notice to
Landtrak for 1991 and 1992. That notice included in Landtrak’s
income all items respondent now asserts are Mr. Comey’s income in
the cases at hand.
Petitioners have not asserted that respondent’s issuance of
the notice to Landtrak should have any effect on the outcome of
the cases at hand, such as attributing all the income items in
controversy to Landtrak, rather than to Mr. Comey. See Clapp v.
Commissioner, 875 F.2d 1396, 1401-1402 (9th Cir. 1989)
(alternative notices attributing same items of income to
individuals and related trusts were proper where Commissioner
contended trusts were shams).
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011