- 63 -
the recipients, Mr. Winn and Mr. Curtis, pursuant to sections
731(a)(1) and 752. Therefore, we shall grant the motion.31
An order granting participating
partner’s motion for partial summary
judgment will be issued.
31 If all of respondent’s arguments in this case, docket
No. 22023-05, and the Court of Federal Claims actions instituted
by CLPP and MP were to be sustained, the overall effect would be
to tax the gain realized on the sale of the Manchester property
three times: First, in 2000, to Mr. Winn and Mr. Curtis on the
liquidating distribution, a second time, in 2001, to Countryside
on the sale of the Manchester property, and a third time, in
2003, on AIG’s redemption of the AIG notes from MP. We suspect
that respondent’s position in these actions is intended to
completely offset what respondent considers to be participating
partner’s and petitioner’s goal of deferring indefinitely any tax
on that gain and to avoid any possibility of being whipsawed. In
addressing the motion, we decide only that the gain is not
recognized to Mr. Winn and Mr. Curtis in 2000 upon their receipt
of a 99-percent limited partnership interest in CLPP or,
alternatively, upon their deemed receipt of the AIG notes.
Page: Previous 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008