- 6 - percent. On November 21, 1995, petitioner executed a promissory note (1995 note) with Mr. Rowe for $605,681 (i.e., his outstanding balance) of the $807,081 total outstanding balance of the transfers. The 1995 note was payable on demand, was freely transferable, had no maturity date or payment schedule, and had a stated interest rate of 10 percent. On January 1, 1998, when the outstanding transfers totaled $1,222,133, petitioner executed two written line of credit agreements with the Rowes for $1,000,000 and $750,000. The line of credit agreements provided that the balances were payable on demand, and the notes were freely transferable. In addition, the agreements provided a stated interest rate of 10 percent and had no maturity date or payment schedule. Petitioner was profitable, and numerous banks sought to lend petitioner money. As a result, FTB worked diligently to retain petitioner’s business, made funds immediately available upon petitioner’s request, and was willing to lend petitioner 100 percent of the transferred amounts. FTB, however, required petitioner to subordinate (i.e., to FTB’s outstanding loans with petitioner) all transfers. In 1993, FTB lent petitioner $1,850,000. The loan agreement stated “no payments shall be made by Borrower to satisfy any * * * [stockholder] indebtedness for so long as the Loans shall remain unpaid.” Petitioner, however, made partial repayments toPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011