Countryside Limited Partnership, CLP Holdings, Inc., Tax Matters Partner - Page 20




                                       - 20 -                                         
               Participating partner submits corresponding computations and           
          makes the same argument with respect to Mr. Curtis; i.e., because           
          the net decrease in Mr. Curtis’s share of Countryside’s and MP’s            
          liabilities resulting from the liquidating distribution (computed           
          to be $7,473,190) was less than his adjusted basis for his                  
          interest in Countryside immediately before that distribution                
          (computed to be $7,760,895), pursuant to section 731(a), no gain            
          was recognized to Mr. Curtis on the liquidating distribution.12             
               Participating partner’s position that neither Mr. Winn nor             
          Mr. Curtis recognized gain on the liquidating distribution is               
          dependent upon his argument that the AIG notes were not                     
          “marketable securities”, as defined in section 731(c)(2).13  In             
          support of that argument, participating partner has submitted two           
          affidavits.  The first is the affidavit of Leslie J. Nanberg (Mr.           
          Nanberg), a registered investment adviser in Massachusetts and a            


               12  Participating partner’s computations for Mr. Winn and              
          Mr. Curtis are reproduced as apps. B and C.                                 
               13  Because the AIG notes constituted more than 90 percent             
          of MP’s assets, by value, and CLPP’s indirect interest (through             
          MP) in those assets constituted more than 90 percent of CLPP’s              
          assets, by value, on the date of the liquidating distribution,              
          Countryside’s liquidating distribution to Mr. Winn and Mr. Curtis           
          of a 99-percent interest in CLPP would be treated as a                      
          distribution of money, for purposes of sec. 731(a), should the              
          AIG notes be considered marketable securities.  See sec.                    
          731(c)(2)(B)(v); sec. 1.731-2(c)(3)(i), Income Tax Regs.                    
          Therefore, the status of the AIG notes as nonmarketable                     
          securities (and, therefore, as property other than money for                
          purposes of sec. 731(a)) is crucial to participating partner’s              
          position, whether or not we disregard the separate existence of             
          CLPP and MP for Federal income tax purposes and treat the                   
          liquidating distribution as a distribution of the AIG notes                 
          themselves, an assumed scenario that participating partner                  
          concedes for purposes of the motion.                                        





Page:  Previous  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  Next 

Last modified: March 27, 2008