Michael T. Caracci and Cindy W. Caracci, et al. - Page 58




                                       - 58 -                                         
          Joyce P. Caracci, Michael Caracci, and Christina C. McQuillen.              
          Sec. 4958(f)(1)(B).  Sta-Home Health Agency of Carthage, Inc.,              
          Sta-Home Health Agency of Greenwood, Inc., and Sta-Home Health              
          Agency of Jackson, Inc., are disqualified persons because they              
          are entities that are 35-percent controlled by disqualified                 
          persons; in fact, members of the Caracci family own 100 percent             
          of the Sta-Home for-profit entities’ voting stock.  Sec.                    
          4958(f)(1)(C).  Accordingly, petitioners are subject to excess              
          benefit taxes under section 4958.                                           
               Because we have decided the value of the Sta-Home tax-exempt           
          entities’ assets on the basis of a revenue multiple, it is                  
          appropriate to ascribe the excess benefit to each of the Sta-Home           
          for-profit entities in proportion to the amounts the 1995                   
          revenues of their respective predecessors bore to the total                 
          revenue.  This produces the following results:                              
               Entity                   Percentage            Benefit                 
          Sta-Home Health Agency        42.1                $2,173,682                
          of Carthage, Inc.                                                           
          Sta-Home Health Agency        30.1                1,554,105                 
          of Greenwood, Inc.                                                          
          Sta-Home Health Agency        27.8                1,435,353                 
          of Jackson, Inc.                                                            
          Because each of the three entities acquired or assumed its                  
          predecessor’s assets and liabilities, as opposed to acquiring its           
          predecessor’s stock, we see no basis to apply a minority discount           
          to the value of the excess benefits each has received.  Nor for             
          that reason is an application of a minority discount appropriate            





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