Goodman v. Commissioner
Opinion
*23 Decisions will be entered under Rule 155.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
FOLEY, JUDGE: By notice dated June 24, 1998, respondent determined deficiencies in, and penalties relating to, Stephen and Doralynn Goodman's 1994 and 1995 Federal income taxes. By notice dated July 16, 1998, respondent determined deficiencies in, and penalties relating to, John and Phyllis Ray's 1993 and 1995 Federal income taxes. After concessions, the sole issue for decision is whether discharge of indebtedness income that is excluded, pursuant to
At the time the petitions were filed, petitioners resided in Plano, Texas. During 1993, Messrs. Goodman and Ray were shareholders in Scientific Plastics, Inc., an S corporation. That year, Scientific Plastics, Inc., realized, but excluded pursuant to
On December 31, 1993, petitioners had suspended (i.e., unused) losses relating to Scientific Plastics, Inc. Petitioners increased their stock bases by the amount of their pro rata shares of Scientific Plastics, Inc.'s, discharge of indebtedness income and, on their 1993 tax returns, deducted their losses.
Respondent contends that, pursuant to
To reflect the foregoing,
Decisions will be entered under Rule 155.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2000 T.C. Memo. 23 (Goodman v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.