- 10 -
consideration of all of the circumstances. See Dixie Dairies
Corp. v. Commissioner, supra at 493.
All of the interest on petitioners’ advances was accrued,
not paid, and, with the exception of the note, there was no fixed
maturity date for repayment of the advances. See A. R. Lantz Co.
v. United States, 424 F.2d 1330, 1333 (9th Cir. 1970) (concluding
that advances were an equity investment in similar
circumstances). Further, petitioners agreed to subordinate their
interest to those of Republic Bank and Betty Jo Byers, whose debt
they had personally guaranteed, see O.H. Kruse Grain & Milling v.
Commissioner, 279 F.2d 123, 126 (9th Cir. 1960) (stating that
subordination to later incurred debt is an indication of equity
rather than debt), affg. T.C. Memo. 1959-110; made many advances
when JTFJ had no working capital, see Datamation Servs., Inc. v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1976-252 (stating that a transaction
appears to be a contribution to capital where advances are made
to provide working capital, and repayment depends solely on the
borrower’s success); and participated in JTFJ’s management, see
O.H. Kruse Grain & Milling v. Commissioner, supra at 126 (stating
that where the taxpayer participates in management, advances are
more likely capital contributions than debt). Moreover,
petitioners made the advances in exchange for the future receipt
of a 50-percent interest in JTFJ’s profits. See Aqualane Shores,
Inc. v. Commissioner, 269 F.2d 116, 119 (5th Cir. 1959) (stating
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011