- 18 -
supported by a valid business purpose and economic substance.
That payment is tainted by petitioner’s sole tax motivation for
participating in these transactions.
Petitioner’s only purpose for transferring to Wildervank its
interests in the Brussels Leaseback and in the Trust Fund was to
create the claimed tax deductions. As respondent’s expert
testified at trial, independent of the production of claimed tax
deductions, there was no purpose to, and no substance for, the
transfer to Wildervank of petitioner’s interests in the Brussels
Leaseback and in the Trust Fund.
As respondent’s expert testified, the RVC had no value. In
fact, due to incomplete information, a significant portion of the
underlying equipment to which the RVC related was not capable of
being valued.
The testimony at trial and the report of the expert who was
used in late 1990 and early 1991, at the time of the original
Brussels Leaseback, were significantly inadequate. The expert
and his report reflect incomplete information on the type of
equipment, the manufacturer of the equipment, the extent of the
equipment, the model of the equipment, and the original market
introduction date of the equipment. In his calculations, the
expert used a beginning life for the equipment that corresponded
with the 1991 Brussels Leaseback, even though the expert knew
that the type of equipment involved in the leaseback had been
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011