Robert Ancira - Page 9




                                         - 9 -                                          
          petitioner received no cash.  Lemishow, therefore, is not on                  
          point.5                                                                       
               Nor do we find any significance in the fact that S.K. did                
          not immediately deliver the shares to Pershing.  In this regard,              
          we point out again that we are not dealing directly with the 60-              
          day limitation on a rollover of a distribution under section                  
          408(d)(3).  Rather, we are concerned with whether the delayed                 
          transfer of the stock certificate alters our conclusion that                  
          there was no distribution from the IRA to petitioner.  At all                 
          times, the IRA, not the petitioner, was the owner of the shares               
          even though it may not have been in physical possession of the                
          stock certificate.                                                            
               Furthermore, to the extent that this fact is relevant, the               
          failure of S.K. to deliver the stock certificate would not                    
          invalidate the transaction.  In Wood v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 114             
          (1989), we held that a bookkeeping error by the trustee of an                 
          IRA, which resulted in a portion of a rollover distribution from              
          another qualified plan not being credited to the IRA account                  
          within the applicable period, did not preclude the rollover.  We              
          noted that “a bookkeeping error does not alter the rights and                 
          responsibilities between parties to a transaction.”  Id. at 121.              
          While the question here is somewhat different, we believe that                

               5  Similarly, respondent’s reliance on Bunney v.                         
          Commissioner, 114 T.C. 259 (2000), and Darby v. Commissioner, 97              
          T.C. 51 (1991), is misplaced.                                                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011