- 66 - Co. v. Commissioner, 8 T.C. 1297 (1947), affd. 168 F.2d 71 (2d Cir. 1948). A. Responsibility for the TMI Expenses–-The Alleged Oral Sponsorship Agreement 1. The Parties’ Positions Petitioners contend that, since TMI’s formation in 1992, Menards and TMI have had an oral agreement that Menards would sponsor TMI’s Indy cars. In lieu of a formal sponsorship fee, petitioners explain, Menards agreed to pay the TMI expenses in exchange for the “full benefits of a founding sponsor.”54 In contrast, respondent contends that there was no oral sponsorship agreement. 2. Terms of the Alleged Oral Sponsorship Agreement At trial, Mr. Menard testified that when TMI was formed in 1992, Menards made an oral agreement with TMI to pay some of TMI’s racing expenses in exchange for “all the benefits of the sponsorship”. As Mr. Menard understood the term “benefits”, TMI 54Petitioners describe the “full benefits” of a “founding sponsor” to include the following: significant, prominent name identification on the race cars, team uniforms, transporters, race car transporters, pit walls and all publicity and promotional materials developed by the team and the IRL[;] hospitality at the races for * * * [Menards’s] suppliers, customers, and guests[;] naming rights for the entries[;] tickets[;] access to viewing suites[;] parking privileges[;] name and likeness grants[;] as well as personal appearances of the TMI drivers.Page: Previous 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011