Barry E. Moore and Deborah E. Moore - Page 38




                                       - 38 -                                         
          assumption agreement, where the “effective as of” phrase makes              
          clear that the intended effective date differs from the execution           
          date.                                                                       
               The parties to the agreement were operating at arm’s length.           
          A retroactive increase in Dr. McKernan’s and Ms. Moore’s share of           
          LLC profits would have necessarily resulted in a retroactive                
          decrease in Dr. Joffe’s share of those profits.  Thus, aside from           
          possible tax rate differentials among the three individuals                 
          (unsupported by any evidence in the record), the respondent is              
          indifferent as regards the respective profit shares of each.  The           
          cases petitioners cite do not involve parties dealing at arm’s              
          length or IRS indifference to their actions.  In Georgiou v.                
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-546, we rejected taxpayer attempts            
          to rely upon (1) documents dated 1 to 3 years before their actual           
          execution dates in order to establish beneficial stock ownership,           
          during the preexecution years, of a corporation the losses of               
          which would then have been available in consolidation to offset             
          the taxpayer’s income in those years, and (2) corporate minutes,            
          a security agreement, promissory notes, and altered accounting              
          records, all dated before, but executed or prepared after,                  
          certain advances by a corporation to the taxpayer shareholder, in           
          order to show that the advances were loans rather than                      
          constructive dividends.  Similarly, each of the other cases                 
          petitioners cite in support of their argument that courts                   







Page:  Previous  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007