- 25 - petitioner argues, signifies compensation for services. A payment pegged to time worked may be nothing more than a payment for services. It may, however, include a distribution of profits, if the only recipients of such payments are the owners of the enterprise. Cf. Klamath Med. Serv. Bureau v. Commissioner, 29 T.C. 339, 348-349 (1957) (payments in proportion to billings, but in excess of billings, were held to be, in part, disguised dividends), affd. 261 F.2d 842 (9th Cir. 1958). Here, all of the recipients of such payments were shareholders of petitioner (shareholder surgeons). Three were full-time employees, entitled to equal payments, while the fourth was a part-time employee, entitled to a proportionate payment. That disparity does not eliminate the possibility of a disguised distribution of profit, but may reflect only an implicit redistribution of ownership upon the decision of a shareholder surgeon partially to retire. We must determine whether there was a disguised distribution of profit by petitioner to the shareholder surgeons. 2. Profit Attributable to Nonshareholder Employment Agreements Petitioner’s gross receipts in each of the audit years exceeded $2 million. Balance sheets prepared for petitioner for those years list as assets only cash, office equipment, leasehold improvements, medical and surgical equipment, automobiles, prepaid rent, and accrued interest (the balance-sheet assets),Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011