Michael V. Domulewicz and Mary Ann Domulewicz - Page 6




                                        - 6 -                                         
          and petitioner sold them on July 7, 1999, for $5,791,057.06                 
          (inclusive of $31,614.75 of accrued interest).  On July 8, 1999,            
          petitioner contributed to DIP the proceeds of the short sale, the           
          obligation to satisfy the short sale, and $116,000 in “margin               
          cash”.  Neither petitioner nor DIP treated the short sale                   
          obligation assumed by DIP as a liability under section 752, and             
          petitioner did not compute his basis in his interest in DIP by              
          taking that obligation into account.  On July 14, 1999, DIP                 
          satisfied the short sale obligation (as well as similar short               
          sale obligations assumed from DIP’s other partners) by purchasing           
          U.S. Treasury notes with a face value of $29,500,000 for                    
          $29,402,053.78 plus accrued interest of $186,188.52 and                     
          delivering the U.S. Treasury notes in satisfaction of the short             
          sales.                                                                      
               On August 12, 1999, petitioner transferred to DIP 1,500                
          shares of publicly traded stock in Integral Vision, Inc. (INVI).            
          On August 23, 1999, DIP sold 4,500 of the 7,500 shares of INVI              
          stock contributed by the partners (in addition to 1,500 shares              
          contributed by petitioner, the other two partners of DIP had                
          contributed a total of 6,000 shares) and claimed a short-term               


               7(...continued)                                                        
          limited liability company.  Because that company is disregarded             
          as an entity for Federal income tax purposes, see sec.                      
          301.7701-2(c)(2), Proced. & Admin. Regs.; see also Kligfeld                 
          Holdings v. Commissioner, supra at 195 n.7, we refer to the sale            
          as if it were entered into directly by petitioner.                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007