- 22 - In Roth v. Commissioner, supra, we applied the step transaction doctrine to integrate a redemption of stock with a sale of stock. An important factor in our decision was that the taxpayer’s interest in the corporation was completely terminated simultaneously with the cash distribution. In this case, the assignment of the lawsuit and the stock sale did not occur simultaneously. Bochica and Norway agreed that the contemplated transactions in the stock sale agreement were to occur at different times. The distribution of the lawsuit was to occur at some point before the transfer of the stock to Norway. Further, the transactions were to occur between different parties. The lawsuit was to be transferred in the form of a distribution from BFI to Bochica, and the stock transfer was to be in the form of a sale of the stock by Bochica to Norway. The transactions may have occurred on the same day; however, they were not simultaneous. Indeed, petitioners stipulated that the assignment of the lawsuit occurred “prior to the transfer of stock”. In Smith v. Commissioner, supra at 717, we held that certain “commissions” paid to the taxpayer in conjunction with a sale of his stock were received as consideration for that stock.13 We 13In Smith v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 705 (1984), the stock purchase agreement allocated amounts to be paid to the taxpayer between the purchase price for the stock and “commissions due”. However, we concluded that the stock sale agreement when construed with a subsequent addendum was ambiguous, and we declined to apply either the standard enunciated in Commissioner (continued...)Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011