-55-
disbursements to be bona fide loans, we must find that when the
funds were disbursed there was an unconditional obligation and
intent on the part of the transferee to repay the money and an
unconditional intent on the part of the transferor to secure
repayment. See Busch v. Commissioner, supra at 948; Haag v.
Commissioner, supra at 615-616; see also Haber v. Commissioner,
supra at 266. Direct evidence of a taxpayer’s state of mind is
generally unavailable, so courts have focused on certain
objective factors to distinguish bona fide loans from, among
other things, disguised distributions. Although objective
factors are most often employed by courts to distinguish debt
from equity in the setting of closely held corporations, see
Hubert Enters., Inc. & Subs. v. Commissioner, supra at 91-92, we
consider them to be most helpful here, accord Gray v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-67 (factors used to determine
whether a corporation’s transfer to a shareholder is a loan
rather than a dividend); Miller v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1996-3 (factors used to determine whether a transfer was made
with a real expectation of repayment and an intention to enforce
a debt), affd. without published opinion 113 F.3d 1241 (9th Cir.
1997). The relevant factors used to distinguish debt from equity
include: (1) The name given to an instrument underlying the
transfer of funds; (2) the presence or absence of a fixed
maturity date and a schedule of payments; (3) the presence or
Page: Previous 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011