- 35 - existing indebtedness to Paulan, which would be ineffective to create bases in Sidal under section 1366(d)(1)(B). See Bergman v. United States, 174 F.3d 928 (8th Cir. 1999); Underwood v. Commissioner, 535 F.2d 309 (5th Cir. 1976). Conversely, the other three sets of promissory notes predate the Paulan direct payments to which they relate. Those promissory notes also fail to support a finding that the corresponding Paulan direct payments, in substance, created bona fide indebtedness from Sidal to petitioners and from petitioners to Paulan in the amounts set forth and on the dates thereof. See Perry v. Commissioner, 392 F.2d 458 (8th Cir. 1968) (predated notes insufficient to prove indebtedness from an S corporation to the taxpayer shareholder), affg. 47 T.C. 159 (1966); Thomas v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-108 (promissory note bearing a date prior to the transaction to which it relates given no weight), affd. 67 Fed. Appx. 582 (11th Cir. 2003). (4) The Minutes The Paulan minutes, in essence, reflect meetings at which petitioners, acting on behalf of Paulan, authorized loans to themselves individually, and the Sidal minutes, in essence, reflect meetings at which petitioners, acting on behalf of Sidal, authorized borrowings from themselves individually. As mere authorizations, those meetings are not evidence that the loans,Page: Previous 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011