- 71 -
We do not agree that petitioner maintained dominion and
control over the funds that were placed in accounts subject to
the TRO. We note first that the relevant inquiry here is
petitioner’s dominion and control vis-a-vis his corporations, not
in relation to Northwest. Respondent at times appears to suggest
the contrary, as when he argues that petitioner’s refusal to turn
the funds in the ANB accounts over to Northwest indicates
petitioner’s exercise of dominion and control. But in refusing
to release the ANB account funds to Northwest, petitioner could
have been acting equally on behalf of his corporations and of
himself, since both were defendants in Northwest’s complaint, and
the funds subject to the TRO were being held, in effect, to
secure whatever claims Northwest might have against petitioner or
his corporations.
We also do not find persuasive of petitioner’s dominion and
control such factors as the ANB accounts’ being established under
petitioner’s name and Social Security number, petitioner’s
initially reporting the interest earned in the accounts on his
own 1988 return, or petitioner’s being given backup withholding
credits with respect to the accounts. Relying on petitioner’s
nominal ownership would elevate form over substance. Similarly,
the position a taxpayer takes on his return is relevant, but far
from dispositive. Respondent’s suggestion that petitioner’s
Page: Previous 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011