DocketNumber: Docket Nos. 5981, 6193
Citation Numbers: 8 B.T.A. 1289
Judges: Morris, Murdock, Siefkin, Trammell
Filed Date: 11/7/1927
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/23/2022
The petitioners contend (1) that the fair market value on March 1, 1913, of the capital stock of the Central Boarding & Supply Co. was $275 per share; (2) that the value of the entire net assets of the corporation transferred to the partnership on dissolution was $78,763.88; (3) that M. S. Engleman’s share in such assets was of a value of $4,375.77; and (4) that F. J. Engleman’s share had a value of $38,506.78.
In support of the contention that the stock had a fair market value of $275 on March 1, 1913, the petitioners introduced evidence as to the amount of earnings of the corporation for the preceding
It may well be, as contended by the respondent, that under the particular facts and circumstances, apart from F. J. Engleman the corporation did not have any good will; that personal qualifications, experience, ability and skill of an individual do not constitute good will as an item of property. Providence Mill Supply Co., 2 B. T. A. 791; Northwestern Steel & Iron Co., 6 B. T. A. 119. But here we are not so much concerned with the question of good will as an item of property. The question here is the value of the stock. All the evidence that has any bearing on that question should be considered. In the absence of sales the value of the assets may be resorted to. It makes no difference by what name an asset is called. Clearly the corporation had an asset in the form of the contract. It was capitalized at $5,000. It clearly had a value in excess of that amount. Considering the earnings and the value of the tangible assets, the corporation had some intangible assets in excess of $50,000. We have a record of earnings for several years prior to basic date and the testimony as to the prospects for the future. We also have an offer to purchase the stock at $250 a share which offer was declined. Considering all the evidence, we think that the stock had a value of $250 a share on March 1, 1913.
In March, 1920, a partnership was formed by the stockholders of the corporation with the same name as the corporation. This partnership continued the same business without any change, except the form of the organization, with the same assets without any interruption. Before the assets could be paid into the partnership, however, they became the property of the stockholders who formed the partnership. The organization of the partnership and the transfer of the Assets to it was contemporaneous with the dissolution of the corporation. It was the purpose to carry on the same business in partnership form instead of corporate form without interruption.
In view of all the facts and circumstances, the assets, both tangible and intangible, belonging to the corporation were transferred to the partnership. The contract with the railroad owned by the corpora
Since we have found that the value of the net assets transferred by the corporation to the partnership was not correctly reflected on the books of the corporation, a reduction of $10,000 should be made in the amount of real estate and a reduction of $4,647.23 should be made in the amount of the equipment.
As an item of $1,317 representing unpaid Federal taxes was not taken into consideration at the time of the transfer, the amount of the net assets should be further reduced by this amount. The gain taxable to each of the petitioners is the difference between the March 1, 1913, value of the stock, which was greater than cost, and the value of the assets to which each was entitled by virtue of his stock ownership.
Judgment will be entered on 10 days' notice, v/nder Rule 50.