-222- whether ownership changed from the initial issuance dates of the stock certificates that Kanter produced. When the trustees of Kanter’s family trusts, Baskes and Weisgal, were asked to produce documents, they, likewise, failed to do so, on the ground that they did not have the requested information in their possession. Weisgal, Transcr. at 469-470; Baskes, Transcr. at 574-578. PSAC had a “policy” of refusing to turn documents over to anyone other than their owner. Exh. 429; Exh. 9021, at 4; Gallenberger, Transcr. at 2733-2734. OPINION A. The Parties’ Positions Respondent determined that (1) Kanter, Ballard, and Lisle earned the moneys The Five paid to IRA, THC, and other Kanter- related entities during the years at issue; (2) Kanter later directed and allocated much of that money to himself, Ballard, and Lisle primarily through BWK (10 percent), TMT (45 percent), and Carlco (45 percent), respectively; and (3) Kanter and Lisle shared fees that Schaffel paid to THC on Travelers transactions (with Lisle receiving a portion of his share through FPC Subventure Partnership). Respondent first contends that IRA, THC, Carlco, TMT, BWK, and other Kanter-related entities were shams and/or nothing more than the alter egos of Kanter, Ballard, and Lisle. In thePage: Previous 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011