Pediatric Surgical Associates, P.C. - Page 22




                                       - 22 -                                         
          whose contribution to petitioner’s profit we cannot assume to be            
          zero.                                                                       
               Petitioner does not prevail, as a matter of law, based on              
          Bianchi v. Commissioner, supra.                                             
                    b.  Richlands Med. Association v. Commissioner                    
               Petitioner refers us to one of our memorandum opinions,                
          Richlands Med. Association v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990-660,            
          affd. without published opinion 953 F.2d 639 (4th Cir. 1992), for           
          the following proposition:  Specifically, the Tax Court held                
          “petitioner’s associates were entitled to receive, as                       
          compensation for their services to patients, 100 percent of the             
          collections recorded by petitioner as attributable to such                  
          services.”  In Richlands Med. Association, we did so find.  We              
          did that, however, after finding that respondent, in his notice             
          of deficiency, had allowed such amounts as a deduction for                  
          compensation.                                                               
               In Richlands Med. Association, the taxpayer not only                   
          provided physician’s services but also owned a hospital that                
          provided medical services ancillary to physician’s services.                
          With respect to the taxpayer’s system of compensation, under                
          which all funds left after the payment of expenses and the                  
          establishment of reserves were distributed to its associates                
          (owner employees), we observed that the taxpayer’s expert, an               
          accountant, was unable to explain how the taxpayer could ever               






Page:  Previous  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011