West Coast Marketing Corp. v. Commissioner

46 T.C. 32, 1966 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 118
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedApril 18, 1966
DocketDocket No. 126-65
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 46 T.C. 32 (West Coast Marketing Corp. v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
West Coast Marketing Corp. v. Commissioner, 46 T.C. 32, 1966 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 118 (tax 1966).

Opinion

The Commissioner determined a deficiency in petitioner’s income tax for the fiscal year ended June 30,1960, in the amount of $50,911.97.

The sole issue is whether the substance of a certain transaction was a taxable sale or exchange by the taxpayer of its interest in certain land or whether the realized gain in respect thereof is to escape taxation under section 354(a) (1) of the 1954 Code through the use of an intermediate corporation to which such property was first transferred.

BINDINGS OP PACT

Some of the facts have been stipulated, and, as stipulated, are incorporated herein by reference.

Petitioner, a Florida corporation, filed its Federal income tax return for the fiscal year ending June 30,1960, with the district director of internal revenue, Jachsonville, Fla.

Max B. Cohen is the sole stockholder and president of petitioner. His principal business was farming, but he has not farmed since 1955. He had formed petitioner in 1936 and transferred his farm lands to it. These lands are located in Manatee County, Fla.

On January 4, 1956, Cohen entered into contractual arrangements to purchase about 12,000 acres of land in Hillsborough County, Fla., from C. W. Palmore and his wife. The total acreage involved was considered for convenience as comprising three parts, referred to respectively as the ISTorth Tract, the Middle Tract, and the South Tract; and the foregoing contractual arrangements took the form of three separate agreements, each with respect to one of these tracts.

The North Tract contained approximately 4,450 acres, the South Tract approximately 3,000 acres, and the Middle Tract approximately 4,500 acres. Pursuant to the terms of each agreement, Cohen deposited in escrow $10,000 for each of the three tracts, or a total of $30,000.

The purchase price of the land in all three agreements was $100 per acre and the deposit of $10,000 for each of the three tracts was to be applied toward the purchase price of such tract at the time of closing.

Subsequent to ¡the execution of these agreements, Cohen assigned his interest in the Middle Tract to petitioner.

By warranty deed dated July 12, 1956, and recorded on July 18, 1956, the Palmores transferred title to the Middle Tract to petitioner, which contemporaneously executed a mortgage therefor in respect of its remaining obligation in the approximate amoimt of $319,704.

Sometime prior to September 1956, George Coury, a banker and stockbroker, learned that Cohen was having difficulty in obtaining funds to consummate the purchase of the North and South tracts of land and that he might be “amenable to a partner.” Coury was familiar with the property comprising all three tracts and wished to obtain an interest therein for speculative purposes of resale. He met with Cohen and concluded a deal whereby he would acquire an undivided one-half interest in the options or agreements which Cohen held in respect of the North and South tracts and an undivided one-half interest in the Middle Tract itself which was owned by petitioner. That deal was formalized in a contract dated September 19, 1956, between Cohen, petitioner, and Coury. In that contract Coury agreed to pay Cohen $150,000 (calculated at the rate of $25 an acre for 6,000 acres, being one-half of the total estimated acreage of the three tracts) as a bonus or premium in order to enable him to purchase an undivided one-half interest in the three tracts. At the same time the petitioner agreed to convey to Coury an undivided one-half interest in the Middle Tract for $64,667.17, representing one-half of petitioner’s actual investment in that property, and Coury agreed to assume and pay one-half of petitioner’s obligations under the mortgage which it had given in respect of the Middle Tract. In addition, the contract provided for an assignment by Cohen to Coury of an undivided one-half interest in the two executory agreements covering the North Tract and the South Tract for $10,000, representing one-half of the deposits theretofore made by Cohen on those two agreements; and Cohen and Coury each agreed further to contribute one-half of the money required to close those two purchase agreements.

The foregoing contract of September 19,1956, also contained, among others, the following provisions:

4. In the event that either of the parties to this agreement, or their respective nominees, receives a bona fide offer to purchase any one or more of the three tracts covered by this agreement, or any part or parts thereof, which offer in his or its opinion should be accepted, he or it shall forthwith transmit said offer in writing to his or its tenant in common at the address hereinafter set forth. Thereafter, the tenant in common receiving said notice shall have a period of thirty days within which to either approve said third party offer or to meet the terms of said third party offer by purchasing the interest of the other tenant in common at the same price and terms offered by said third party.
7. It is understood and agreed between tbe parties bereto that either Cohen or Coury may assign his interest in the contracts herein described to a corporation formed, or to be formed, by them, or either of them, and title to the real property described in this agreement may become vested in said corporation or corporations, * * *

Coury’s intention at the time he entered into this agreement was to resell the land for profit. He did not intend to farm the land with Cohen. The record contains no convincing evidence that Cohen ever intended to farm any of these lands, either individually, or through petitioner, or otherwise, or that they were acquired and held for any purpose other than to resell at a profit.

Pursuant to paragraph 7, above, title to Coury’s one-half interest in each of the three tracts was taken by each of three corporations, respectively, controlled by Coury and unnamed associates to whom he referred collectively as his “syndicate.” Thus, on September 24,1956, the Palmores transferred title to the South Tract to Cohen and Coury-Florida Land and Oil Corp.; on December 28, 1956, the Palmores transferred title to the North Tract to Cohen and George Corny Land Co.; and on January 31, 1957, petitioner transferred an undivided one-half interest in the Middle Tract to Amelia Coury Holding Co.

As of February 1,1957, petitioner and Amelia Coury Holding Co, each owned an undivided one-half interest in the Middle Tract; Cohen and George Coury Land Co. each owned an undivided one-half interest in the North Tract; and Cohen and Coury-Florida Land & Oil Corp. each owned an undivided one-half interest in the South Tract.

In August 1957, Coury learned that Cohen was having some financial difficulties and desired to sell half of his interest in the three tracts of land in order to meet certain obligations.

Under date of August 14, 1957, an agreement was entered into wherein petitioner and Cohen, referred to as vendors, agreed to sell, and Coury, referred to as vendee but acting as nominee for Joseph T. Maroon, trustee, agreed to buy, for $375,000,50 percent of the vendors’ undivided one-half interest in the North Tract, South Tract, and Middle Tract. Paragraph 8 of the agreement con-tamed the following provision:

8.

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

Related

Tribune Co. v. Comm'r
125 T.C. No. 8 (U.S. Tax Court, 2005)
Santa Monica Pictures, L.L.C. v. Comm'r
2005 T.C. Memo. 104 (U.S. Tax Court, 2005)
Trinova Corp. v. Commissioner
108 T.C. No. 6 (U.S. Tax Court, 1997)
Weikel v. Commissioner
1986 T.C. Memo. 58 (U.S. Tax Court, 1986)
Everhart v. Commissioner
1982 T.C. Memo. 396 (U.S. Tax Court, 1982)
Vest v. Commissioner
57 T.C. 128 (U.S. Tax Court, 1971)
Plantation Patterns, Inc. v. Commissioner
1970 T.C. Memo. 182 (U.S. Tax Court, 1970)
Harris v. Commissioner
1968 T.C. Memo. 86 (U.S. Tax Court, 1968)
West Coast Marketing Corp. v. Commissioner
46 T.C. 32 (U.S. Tax Court, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
46 T.C. 32, 1966 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 118, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-coast-marketing-corp-v-commissioner-tax-1966.