- 20 -
Cir. 1960), and Miller-Dunn v. Commissioner, a Memorandum
Opinion of this Court dated Feb. 28, 1946, for the proposition
that no formal corporate resolution is required for constructive
receipt. Fetzer Refrigerator Co. and O.H. Kruse Grain & Milling
involved contractual rents that had been accrued on the
corporate taxpayer’s books prior to the end of its fiscal year.
In each case the rental amounts were set forth in a lease
agreement and were reflected by entries on the corporation’s
books as of the end of the fiscal year, giving the
shareholder/lessor the right as well as the power of withdrawal.
Fetzer Refrigerator Co. v. United States, supra at 579
(“Although Mr. Fetzer never physically received the amounts due
him, he did possess the power and the right to receive the
payments.” (Emphasis added.)).
We agree with petitioner that the doctrine of constructive
receipt does not require a specific corporate resolution
authorizing the compensation. A corporation can act in other
ways. For example, the award of compensation could be set in
advance under a written contract that was itself authorized by
proper corporate procedures. The compensation could be set
through the formal act of an agent who had a proper delegation
of authority from the corporation. However, petitioner has
failed to cite any authority for the proposition that the
compensation could be set other than through formal and
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011