Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. & Subsidiaries - Page 53




                                       - 53 -                                         
          Niedermeyer Foundation, a tax-exempt organization.  The taxpayers           
          alleged that the distribution by Lents to them was in exchange              
          for their AT&T stock.  The Commissioner alleged that the sale was           
          a section 304 transaction between related corporations and that             
          the distribution was a taxable dividend under sections 301 and              
          302.                                                                        
               This Court first considered whether the sale was a deemed              
          redemption under section 304(a)(1).  After applying the                     
          constructive ownership rules of section 318(a) as required by               
          section 304(c), this Court concluded that the taxpayers were in             
          control of both AT&T and Lents immediately prior to the sale and            
          that the transaction in which Lents acquired the taxpayers’ AT&T            
          common stock must be treated as a redemption under section                  
          304(a)(1).                                                                  
               This Court then addressed the taxpayers’ contention that,              
          even if the sale were treated as a deemed redemption under                  
          section 304(a)(1), the taxpayers nevertheless were entitled to              
          treat the distribution from Lents as full payment in exchange for           
          their AT&T stock under section 302(a) by meeting one of the                 
          conditions of section 302(b).  After rejecting the taxpayers’               
          argument under section 302(b)(1), the Court turned to their                 
          arguments under section 302(b)(3).  Among other things, the                 
          taxpayers argued that the distribution was in complete                      
          termination of their ownership interest in AT&T, contending that            






Page:  Previous  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011