Edward C. Tietig - Page 32




                                       - 32 -                                         
          company ceased business in 1991.  Petitioner argues that the                
          amount of the capital loss is $140,800.                                     
               The principal dispute between the parties turns on whether             
          petitioner’s basis34 in Eureka Field Nursery stock was reduced by           
          a reported $155,440.09 reduction in Eureka Field Nursery’s                  
          accumulated adjustment account (the undistributed earnings on               
          which tax has been paid by Eureka Field Nursery’s shareholders)             
          in 1986.35                                                                  
               Petitioner asserts that the 1986 reduction in the                      
          accumulated adjustment account was not a distribution; rather, it           
          was an accounting entry to correct a prior error.  According to             



               34Respondent determined petitioner’s adjusted stock basis in           
          Eureka Field Nursery by using the figures reported on the                   
          company’s Forms 1120S for the years 1983 through 1990, inclusive.           
          Respondent made two variations from strict adherence to the                 
          income tax returns.  The first variation involves the treatment             
          of the reported $155,440.09 reduction in Eureka Field Nursery’s             
          accumulated adjustment account in 1986 (discussed above).  The              
          second variation involves a $43 adjustment to petitioner’s stock            
          basis in 1990, which petitioner has not disputed.  Thus, we                 
          consider the $43 adjustment conceded by petitioner.                         
               35Respondent determined that petitioner’s adjusted basis of            
          $145,151 in his Eureka Field Nursery stock was reduced to zero as           
          a result of the $155,440.09 distribution.  See sec.                         
          1367(a)(2)(A).  As a result, petitioner realized no gross income            
          from the distribution to the extent of $145,151, his basis in the           
          Eureka Field Nursery stock.  See sec. 1368(b)(1).  Accordingly,             
          respondent asserts that petitioner should realize the amount in             
          excess of his adjusted basis in his Eureka Field Nursery stock,             
          $10,289, as gain ($155,440.09 - $145,151 = $10,289.09).  See sec.           
          1368(b)(2).  Respondent concedes that his examiner erred by                 
          applying this excess against petitioner’s shareholder loans with            
          Eureka Field Nursery.  Instead, this figure constituted gain to             
          petitioner.  See id.                                                        





Page:  Previous  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011