- 8 -
reorganization submitted by LGA somehow determined that Sunrise
was not a separate entity.
Respondent’s Contentions:
Respondent’s contentions, as contained in Respondent’s
Memorandum of Authorities, may be summarized as follows:
Respondent notes that the parties’ disagreement is based
upon petitioner’s erroneous premise that a bankruptcy court’s
determination as to the collectibility of a debtor’s claim is the
same as the determination of a deficiency in income tax.
Respondent posits that petitioner’s position is that respondent
is collaterally estopped “from asserting any claims against
Petitioner for additional deficiencies in corporate income tax
and interest for the fiscal years ended February 28, 1993 and
February 28, 1994.”
Respondent states:
The respondent is in complete agreement with this
conclusion. The respondent agrees that it is
2(...continued)
On December 18, 1998, the Bankruptcy Court for the
Northern District of Oklahoma issued an Order
Confirming Plan * * *. In these documents the
bankruptcy court substantively consolidated LGA and the
Sunrise Island Timber Company general and limited
partnership into one entity. In so doing the Court
recognized the “sham” nature of the partnership and the
fraudulent acts of self-dealing as well as asset
transfers performed by Bleidt and Lobato-Bleidt.
Therefore, the entity should be consolidated with LGA
as a single entity in computing the federal corporate
income tax liability of LGA for the years in issue.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011