- 15 - however, acknowledges that the increases to petitioner’s 1995 and 1996 income were attributable to gain on the sale of real property and stocks. Those increases, compared to the average of the prior 3 years, amounted to $25,922 and $171,719 for 1995 and 1996, respectively.4 Considered as a percentage increase over the 3 years prior to 1995, the increases were 4 percent and 27 percent, respectively. Petitioner contends that its assets were “interwoven with the retail automobile business” and that it was Mr. Valente’s knowledge, expertise, and involvement that made petitioner financially successful. Petitioner acknowledges that the Valentes did not devote their full time to petitioner but argues that petitioner’s success was nevertheless dependent upon the Valentes. D. The Conflict of Interest Between the Company and the Employee The question posed here is whether the Valentes used their control of petitioner to pay deductible salary, as opposed to nondeductible dividends. As contended by respondent, substantially all of petitioner’s income was paid out in the form of compensation to the Valentes. In that regard, respondent references Elliotts, Inc. v. Commissioner, 716 F.2d at 1243, for the proposition that there is a 4 For computation of these increases see infra note 6.Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011