Tesco Driveaway Co., Inc. - Page 9




                                        - 9 -                                         
          taxes to attach upon the actual (or constructive) receipt of                
          wages”); Mazur v. Commissioner, 986 F. Supp. 752 (W.D.N.Y. 1997)            
          (upholding regulation).  Compare sec. 1.451-2, Income Tax Regs.,            
          with sec. 31.3121(a)-2(b), Employment Tax Regs.  Petitioner’s               
          treatment of the Gentrys’ compensation as not constructively                
          received during its 1994 fiscal year for employment tax purposes            
          is inconsistent with its claim of constructive receipt for                  
          income tax purposes.                                                        
               We agree with respondent that petitioner has failed to meet            
          its burden of proving that Doyce Gentry or his sons                         
          constructively received the compensation prior to the end of                
          petitioner’s fiscal year.  In order to constructively receive               
          funds, the recipient must have both the power and the right to              
          withdraw the funds from the taxpayer’s account.  Jerome Castree             
          Interiors, Inc. v. Commissioner, 64 T.C. 564 (1975), affd.                  
          without published opinion 539 F.2d 714 (7th Cir. 1976).  Even if            
          we were to view Mr. Gentry’s and petitioner’s accountant’s                  
          testimony in a light most favorable to petitioner, petitioner               
          did not comply with the terms of its own bylaws for awarding                
          compensation by the end of the fiscal year.  Petitioner is a                
          legal entity separate from Mr. Gentry.  It must act through                 
          proper corporate procedures.  We cannot overlook the lack of                
          corporate formalities simply because Mr. Gentry had broad power             
          to control the corporation.  Otherwise, as respondent brought               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011