- 62 - petitioner's actual after-tax rate of return; and (6) the officers' compensation. Year-End Fair Fair Actual Actual Officers' Year Equity Return RateReturn Return Return Rate Compensation 1985 $176,489 1986 255,018 NA NA $78,529 44.5% $195,000 1987 442,796 17.50% $44,628 187,778 73.6 81,282 1988 543,785 19.57 86,655 100,990 22.8 285,912 1989 834,499 21.61 117,512 290,714 53.5 243,090 1990 1,907,331 20.29 169,320 1,072,832 128.6 304,478 1991 2,242,380 20.72 395,199 335,049 17.6 930,100 1992 2,965,064 19.76 443,094 722,684 32.2 788,400 1993 3,042,630 19.67 583,228 77,566 2.6 988,920 1994 2,904,692 17.59 535,199 (137,938) -4.5 1,246,437 1995 2,890,748 18.60 569,320 (13,944) -0.5 1,293,948 1996 3,133,877 17.18 496,631 243,129 8.4 1,099,825 From 1986 to 1992, petitioner's actual after-tax return on equity greatly exceeded the expected fair return on equity, and the increase in petitioner's retained earnings increased the value of its stock. During that period, Dennis and Curtis, in effect, treated the company as a "growth stock", reinvesting earnings to increase the value of their shares in the company. A hypothetical investor would have considered $2,788,575 growth in equity to have been an exceptional performance for the 7-year period from 1986 to 1992 ($176,489 beginning year equity in 1986 to $2,965,064 end of year equity in 1992). As Mr. Reilly points out in his opinion, Dennis and Curtis kept large amounts of cash in the company in order to build the business. Rather than having the profits distributed to them, they caused petitioner to retain the earnings, in effect,Page: Previous 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011