- 69 - earlier analysis of this transaction, we conclude that petitioner exercised personal dominion and control over the ANB No. 2 funds when he sought to employ them to secure his release from any personal liability with respect to his corporations’ obligations to Northwest. Thus, by mid-1988 petitioner had exercised personal dominion and control over all of the corporate funds that he had transferred to personal accounts in early 1988. Although we conclude petitioner had exercised dominion and control over the funds at issue by mid-1988, the question remains whether the taxability of the funds to petitioner is affected by the fact that some of the funds were returned to custodial accounts or otherwise made subject to the TRO before yearend 1988. Funds over which a taxpayer has obtained dominion and control, lawfully or unlawfully, are not taxable to him to the extent they are repaid before yearend. Mais v. Commissioner, 51 T.C. 494 (1968); Leaf v. Commissioner, 33 T.C. 1093 (1960); Stovall v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1983-450; see also Hammer v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1989-396 (amounts returned by shareholder to corporation in subsequent year not taxable where shareholder derives no benefit); Rev. Rul. 65-254, 1965-2 C.B. 50 (deduction allowable under section 165 with respect to embezzled funds in the year of repayment). In Leaf v. Commissioner, supra at 1096, we held that a controlling shareholder who takes fundsPage: Previous 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011