-256- address the parties’ contentions with respect to this transaction. We conclude that the Corona transaction and the subsequent sale of the $79 million receivable were part of a general scheme to obtain and exploit tax attributes in that receivable using the partnership tax rules. Mr. Lerner effectively duplicated the built-in loss that existed in the contributed $79 million receivable. SMP also received approximately $15 million from Imperial as a fee for the loss that Imperial realized on the sale of the receivable to TroMetro. We cannot agree that the parties entered into the transaction with any intention of engaging in a film finance business. Indeed, Imperial’s CEO, Wayne Snavely, testified that tax losses were driving the Corona transaction and were the primary reason in 1997 for Imperial’s investing in the Corona transaction. He further testified that his analysis leading up to the Corona transaction was directed primarily to the transaction’s tax aspects and that to that end he directed Imperial’s chief financial officer, Kevin Villani, to get together with Imperial’s accountants to see whether the Corona transactions and its tax advantages worked for Imperial. Mr. Snavely acknowledged that he had a personal interest in the film finance business; however, his testimony indicated clearly that film finance was not considered as a reason forPage: Previous 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011