Karns Prime & Fancy Food, Ltd. - Page 26

                                       - 26 -                                         
               We turn now to petitioner’s reliance on the statement in               
          Commissioner v. Indianapolis Power & Light Co., 493 U.S. 203, 210           
          (1990), that “In determining whether a taxpayer enjoys ‘complete            
          dominion’ over a given sum, * * * The key is whether the taxpayer           
          has some guarantee that he will be allowed to keep the money.”              
          According to petitioner,                                                    
                    There was no guarantee in April of 1999 that the                  
               Petitioner would meet the purchase obligations or other                
               obligations under the Supply and Requirements Agree-                   
               ments for the ensuing six years.  Accordingly, there                   
               was no guarantee that future debt service payments                     
               would be forgiven. * * *                                               
                  *       *       *       *       *       *       *                   
                    Even if one assumes that on the anniversary date                  
               the Petitioner had met the purchase requirements under                 
               the Supply and Requirements Agreement, there was still                 
               no guarantee that the debt service payment would be                    
               forgiven because the Note required “that the borrower                  
               is in compliance with, and shall not have materially                   
               breached or then be an uncured default, under the                      
               Supply Agreement” * * *.                                               
               Petitioner’s contentions in reliance on Commissioner v.                
          Indianapolis Power & Light Co., supra, miss the point that the              
          Supreme Court established in that case.  The issue presented in             
          Indianapolis Power & Light Co. was whether certain deposits that            
          the taxpayer, a power company, received from its customers were             
          income.  In resolving that issue, the Supreme Court analyzed                
          whether the taxpayer enjoyed “complete dominion” over such                  

          Commissioner, 88 T.C. 604, 616 (1987), affd. without published              
          opinion 855 F.2d 855 (8th Cir. 1988).                                       

Page:  Previous  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011