Samuel S. Lowe III and Nancy S. Lowe - Page 3

                                        - 2 -                                         
               Respondent determined a Federal income tax deficiency for              
          petitioners’ 2000 taxable year in the amount of $4,575.  The                
          principal issue for decision is whether a $50,512 payment                   
          received by petitioner Samuel S. Lowe III (Mr. Lowe) under a                
          long-term incentive plan constitutes ordinary income or capital             
          gain.                                                                       
                                     Background                                       
               Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.               
          The stipulations of the parties, with accompanying exhibits, are            
          incorporated herein by this reference.  At the time the petition            
          was filed in this case, petitioners resided in Mary Esther,                 
          Florida.                                                                    
               During 1998, Mr. Lowe was employed as an executive of                  
          UniversalCom, Inc. (UCI).  In June of 1998, Mr. Lowe became a               
          participant in the UniversalCom Inc. Key Executive Equity                   
          Appreciation Plan III, referred to as KEEAP II.2  The stated                
          purpose of the plan was “To provide long term equity financial              
          incentives for the key executives of UniversalCom, Inc. (UCI)               
          while they create substantial economic value on behalf of the               
          Company’s shareholders.”                                                    
               The plan documentation established a “Beginning Plan Equity            
          Value” for UCI of $12,975,000 and provided for each key employee            


               2 The apparent discrepancy between the titles Key Executive            
          Equity Appreciation Plan III and KEEAP II is not otherwise                  
          explained by the record.                                                    




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011