E.J. Harrison & Sons, Inc. - Page 3

                                        - 3 -                                         
          When this case was before us originally, respondent argued that             
          petitioner’s deductions for compensation paid to Mrs. Harrison              
          during the audit years should be reduced on account of the                  
          unreasonableness of her salary as follows:                                  
                         Amount    Amount         Amount                              
               Year      Deducted      Allowed     Disallowed                         
               1995      $860,682     $54,215      $806,467                           
               1996       818,059      56,040       762,019                           
               1997       600,059      58,734       541,325                           
          Petitioner argued that all amounts paid to her during the audit             
          years were reasonable and, therefore, were deductible in full.              
          We concluded that petitioner may deduct the following amounts as            
          compensation for services performed by Mrs. Harrison during the             
          audit years:                                                                
                          Year                     Amount                             
                          1995                     $98,000                            
                          1996                     101,000                            
                          1997                     106,000                            
          We were persuaded that, during the audit years, petitioner was a            
          company run by Mrs. Harrison’s sons, her role in the operations             
          of the company had always been “secondary”, and her titles of               
          president and chairman of the board were titular and not                    
          reflective of her status in the company.  We found that her role            
          as an essentially compliant member of petitioner’s board of                 
          directors justified her receipt of only a small fraction of the             
          compensation paid to her during the audit years.  We considered             
          apposite respondent’s analogy of Mrs. Harrison’s activities on              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011