- 13 -
b. Family Attribution and Aggregation
Intrafamily sales were excluded from the operation of former
section 382(a) by means of stock attribution (as opposed to
shareholder aggregation) rules. Specifically, purchases of stock
from persons whose stock ownership would be attributed to the
purchaser under the family attribution rules of section 318 were
ignored for purposes of determining whether an ownership change
by “purchase” had occurred. See former sec. 382(a)(3) and (4).
Although family members were potentially subject to aggregation
for purposes of determining the 10 largest shareholders at
yearend, that rule applied only if loss corporation stock owned
by one was attributed to the other under the family attribution
rules of section 318.11 Former sec. 382(a)(2) and (3). For that
reason, the aggregation rule of former section 382(a)(2), unlike
the aggregation rule of section 382(l)(3)(A)(i), necessarily
applied as of the date on which stock ownership was measured (in
the case of former section 382(a)(2), at yearend). Accordingly,
no inference can be drawn from former section 382(a)(2) as to
whether, as respondent maintains, the identification of the
individuals whose family members are aggregated under section
11 Persons aggregated under former sec. 382(a)(2) were then
disaggregated for purposes of measuring changes in stock
ownership. See former sec. 1.382(a)-1(d)(3)(i), Income Tax Regs.
(as revised in 1968). Thus, the actual number of persons whose
stock ownership was subject to scrutiny at yearend could be
greater than 10.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011