Paulson v. Commissioner

1991 T.C. Memo. 643, 62 T.C.M. 1622, 1991 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 698
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Paulson v. Commissioner. Read the opinion of the Court — 62 T.C.M. 968
United States Tax Court·Decided December 26, 1991·No. Docket Nos. 9322-90, 9472-90·Unpublished

Opinion

JON J. PAULSON AND GLORIA J. PAULSON, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent; P QUAD COMPANY TRUST, ARMAGEDDON, INC., TRUSTEE, AND PARNELL, INC., TRUSTEE, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Paulson v. Commissioner
Docket Nos. 9322-90, 9472-90
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1991-643; 1991 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 698; 62 T.C.M. (CCH) 1622; T.C.M. (RIA) 91643;
December 26, 1991, Filed

*698 Decisions will be entered under Rule 155.

Jon J. Paulson and Gloria J. Paulson, pro se in docket No. 9322-90.
John Koch, for the petitioner in docket No. 9472-90.
John C. Schmittdiel, for the respondent.
COHEN, Judge.

COHEN

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

In these consolidated cases, respondent determined deficiencies in and additions to petitioners' Federal income taxes as follows:

Additions to Tax
Sec.Sec.Sec.
PetitionersYearDeficiencies 6653(a)(1)(A)6653(a)(1)(B)6661
Paulson12/31/86$ 19,248$ 962*$ 4,812
P Quad Co.10/31/8623,8401,192 **5,960

All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code as in effect for the year in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. The determinations against the Paulsons, on the one hand, and P Quad Company, on the other, reflect alternative positions of respondent*699 as to which petitioner is taxable on certain income.

The issues for decision are whether Jon J. Paulson and Gloria J. Paulson are taxable on income reported by P Quad Company for the period ended October 31, 1986; whether petitioners are entitled to deductions claimed on their respective returns beyond those conceded by respondent; whether Jon J. Paulson is liable for self-employment tax on income reported by P Quad Company; and whether petitioners are liable for the additions to tax under sections 6653(a) and 6661.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts have been stipulated, and the stipulated facts are incorporated in our findings by this reference. Petitioners Jon J. and Gloria J. Paulson (the Paulsons) resided in Minnesota and petitioner P Quad Company had its principal place of business in Minnesota at the time the petitions were filed.

Beginning in 1975 and continuing through September 1983, Jon J. Paulson practiced veterinary medicine in a partnership known as Western Veterinary Service. Jon J. Paulson's partners in Western Veterinary Service included three other veterinarians, Michael Dierenfeld, Lloyd Emond, and Loren Johnson. During 1983, Jon J. Paulson and Lloyd Emond*700 proposed to change the business form of the veterinary practice from a partnership to a business trust. Subsequently, James and Joan Noske met with the partners and presented a plan that included operating the veterinary practice in the form of a business trust.

The Paulsons agreed to establish Western Veterinary Company and P Quad Company as business trusts after only a cursory investigation of the legal ramifications of the trusts. Jon J. Paulson's investigation of the business trust form included discussions with James and Joan Noske and a telephone conversation with an attorney recommended by James Noske.

As recommended by the Noskes, Parnell, Inc. (Parnell), and Armageddon, Inc. (Armageddon), nonprofit corporations formed under the laws of South Dakota, would form a trust using an instrument referred to as a declaration of trust and would thereafter act as trustees of the trust. The trust was to be an unincorporated common law trust or Massachusetts Trust. The trustees were to file the declaration of trust with the Minnesota secretary of state. The beneficial interests in the trust were to be represented by trust certificates. The certificates would enable their holders*701 to participate proportionately in all dividends and other distributions of income or principal from the trust. During the life of the trust, the certificate holders would have no right to trust property, only a right to their proportionate share of dividends and distributions as actually paid. Upon termination of the trust, the trustees would distribute all property, income, and accrued interest in the trust to the certificate holders.

The business and property of the trust were to be managed by the board of trustees, who were named in the declaration of trust (Parnell and Armageddon).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Paulson v. Commissioner, 1991 T.C. Memo. 643, 62 T.C.M. 1622, 1991 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 698 (tax 1991).

1991 T.C. Memo. 643 (Paulson v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gregory v. Helvering
293 U.S. 465 (Supreme Court, 1935)
United States v. Cumberland Public Service Co.
338 U.S. 451 (Supreme Court, 1950)
Furman v. Commissioner
45 T.C. 360 (U.S. Tax Court, 1966)
Wesenberg v. Commissioner
69 T.C. 1005 (U.S. Tax Court, 1978)
Markosian v. Commissioner
73 T.C. 1235 (U.S. Tax Court, 1980)
Vercio v. Commissioner
73 T.C. 1246 (U.S. Tax Court, 1980)
Zmuda v. Commissioner
79 T.C. No. 46 (U.S. Tax Court, 1982)
Schulz v. Commissioner
686 F.2d 490 (Seventh Circuit, 1982)