William J. Cutts - Page 10

                                        - 9 -                                         
               Below-Market Loans                                                     
               During petitioners’ 1997 tax year, ATV and Mr. Cutts had               
          open-account indebtedness to each other.  No interest was paid or           
          accrued on amounts due ATV from Mr. Cutts or on amounts due Mr.             
          Cutts from ATV.  During preparation for trial, ATV and respondent           
          prepared separate general ledgers (the ledgers) to show the                 
          respective amounts of debt between ATV and Mr. Cutts and the                
          amount or amounts of imputed interest under section 7872.3                  
               For petitioners’ 1997 tax year, the ledgers included a                 
          “receivable from shareholder” account for amounts due ATV from              
          Mr. Cutts and a “payable to shareholder” account for amounts due            
          Mr. Cutts from ATV.  At all relevant times, Mr. Cutts’s debt to             
          ATV exceeded ATV’s debt to Mr. Cutts.  On his 1997 return, Mr.              
          Cutts did not deduct from his $78,000 Landmark Hall rent income             
          any of the debt that he owed ATV or that ATV owed him.                      
               In ATV’s ledger, at the end of each month of 1997, the                 
          respective debts between ATV and Mr. Cutts are netted out, and              
          interest at the applicable Federal rate (APR) is applied to the             
          balance.  In respondent’s ledger, the column of debt from Mr.               
          Cutts to ATV is maintained separately from the column of debt               
          from ATV to Mr. Cutts, and interest at the APR is computed on the           
          separate monthly balances.                                                  

               3There are small discrepancies in the debt amounts recorded            
          in ATV’s and respondent’s ledgers; those discrepancies should be            
          reconciled by the parties in the Rule 155 computation.                      





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011