Williams v. Comm'r

110 T.C. No. 4, 110 T.C. 27, 1998 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 4
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedJanuary 21, 1998
DocketTax Ct. Dkt. No. 18298-95
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 110 T.C. No. 4 (Williams v. Comm'r) 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
Williams v. Comm'r, 110 T.C. No. 4, 110 T.C. 27, 1998 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 4 (tax 1998).

Opinion

Gerber, Judge:

Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioners’ Federal income tax and a section 66621 accuracy-related penalty as follows:

Sec. 6662
Year Deficiency penalty
1990 $17,451.36
1991 35,394.65 $7,079

After concessions, the issue for our consideration is whether petitioner Steven R. Williams received taxable distributions of $264,078 from Maverick Transportation, Inc., an S corporation, in 1990. Respondent has conceded that petitioners are not liable for the section 6662 accuracy-related penalty for 1991.2

FINDINGS OF FACT3

At the time the petition was filed, petitioners resided in Little Rock, Arkansas. During the years in issue, Steven R. Williams (petitioner) was the president and sole shareholder of Maverick Transportation, Inc. (mti). mti is a trucking company, and petitioner has more than 20 years of experience in the trucking industry.

MTI was founded in 1980 and operated as a subchapter C corporation for a number of years. On July 1, 1988, MTI elected to be taxed as an S corporation. During the time that MTI was a C corporation, MTI had accumulated in excess of $264,078 of earnings and profits that were carried forward to 1990.

During 1990, MTI made distributions to its sole shareholder (petitioner) in the amount of $323,399. Also, for the 1990 taxable year, mti had a “nonseparately”4 computed ordinary loss of $217,341. MTl’s Accumulated Adjustments Account (AAA), at the beginning of the 1990 tax year, had a $349,256 balance. Items of income, loss, and deductions that resulted in positive or negative5 adjustments to MTl’s AAA during the 1990 tax year, including the distributions to petitioner and net ordinary loss, were as follows:

Distributions . ($323,399)
Loss. (217,341)
Contributions . (1,730)
Nondeductible officer insurance . (4,355)
Sec. 274(n) expenditures . (83,214)
Nondeductible fines. (1,225)
Interest income. 17,930

OPINION

The controversy here is not over whether or which reductions should be made to the AAA, but the order in which they are to be made. The adjustments are to be made to the accumulated adjustments account, which was statutorily created to track certain aspects and the character of S corporation distributions. In particular, the issue is whether an S corporation’s AAA must first be reduced by losses incurred by the S corporation for the taxable year prior to determining the tax treatment of shareholder distributions made during the year. Petitioners argue that the tax treatment of distributions should be considered prior to the consideration of annual losses, and respondent argues the converse. In order to understand the technical aspects of the controversy, it is necessary to understand some of the background concerning the S corporation provisions and the purpose of the statutes in question.

Sections 1367 and 1368 were enacted as part of the Sub-chapter S Revision Act of 1982, Pub. L. 97-354, 96 Stat. 1669. An S corporation, like a partnership, is a passthrough entity and, with certain exceptions, the shareholders report gain or loss irrespective of any distributions made to them. Generally, under sections 1367 and 1368, shareholder distributions are to be tax free to the extent of the distributee’s stock basis. Further such tax-free distributions reduce the shareholder’s stock basis. In accord with these concepts, the above-mentioned act also obviated the conceptual need for corporate earnings and profits, except to the extent that an S corporation may possess accumulated earnings from prior years in which it was a subchapter C corporation. See sec. 1371(c).

Where earnings and profits accumulated by a predecessor C corporation exist, they are taken into account in the tax treatment of distributions to S corporation shareholders. This is accomplished through a clearing concept designated as the AAA. The AAA is described and defined in section 1368(e)(1), as follows:

SEC. 1368 (e). Definitions and Special Rules. — For purposes of this section—
(1) Accumulated adjustments account —
(A) In GENERAL. — Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the term “accumulated adjustments account” means an account of the S corporation which is adjusted for the S period in a manner similar to the adjustments under section 1367 (except that no adjustment shall be made for income (and related expenses) which is exempt from tax under this title and the phrase “(but not below zero)” shall be disregarded in section 1367(b)(2)(A)) and no adjustment shall be made for Federal taxes attributable to any taxable year in which the corporation was a C corporation. * * *

An S corporation distribution from accumulated earnings and profits of a predecessor C corporation is treated as a dividend to the extent that the distribution exceeds the S corporation’s AAA. Sec. 1368(c)(1) and (2). The AAA is intended to measure the accumulated taxable income of an S corporation that has not been distributed to the shareholders. The portion of a distribution to a shareholder that does not exceed the AAA is a nontaxable return of capital to the extent of the shareholder’s basis in S corporation stock. Sec. 1368(b) and (c)(1). The AAA is increased for the S corporation’s income and decreased for the S corporation’s losses and deductions and for nontaxable distributions to shareholders. See secs. 1367 and 1368. Distributions in excess of the AAA balance are treated in the same manner as subchapter C dividend distributions. Accordingly, to the extent of an S corporation’s accumulated earnings and profits from a prior C corporation, such shareholder distributions are taxable as ordinary income.

In that regard, the controversy here focuses on the order in which reductions are to be made to the AAA. If petitioners are correct, then no part of the 1990 distributions to petitioner would result in taxable ordinary income. If, however, respondent is correct, a distribution in excess of the AAA would result in taxable income and an income tax deficiency for petitioners.

At the beginning of 1990, MTI had an AAA balance of $349,256. During 1990, MTI had an ordinary loss of $217,341 and made distributions to petitioner of $323,399, both of which call for negative adjustments to the AAA. Petitioners argue that in determining the tax consequences of the distributions, the distributions should be applied in reduction of the AAA balance as of the beginning of 1990 (i.e., prior to the $217,341 reduction attributable to the annual operating loss). Under petitioners’ suggested approach, the distributions would be a nontaxable return of capital that decrease petitioner’s tax basis in his stock rather than result in a taxable dividend because the 1990 distributions did not exceed MTl’s beginning of the year AAA balance.

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

Related

Austin v. Comm'r
2017 T.C. Memo. 69 (U.S. Tax Court, 2017)
John E. Rogers & Frances L. Rogers v. Commissioner
2014 T.C. Memo. 141 (U.S. Tax Court, 2014)
Rogers v. Comm'r
2011 T.C. Memo. 277 (U.S. Tax Court, 2011)
Graham v. Hanna
677 S.E.2d 686 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2009)
Toberman v. Commissioner
2000 T.C. Memo. 221 (U.S. Tax Court, 2000)
Thurman v. Commissioner
1998 T.C. Memo. 233 (U.S. Tax Court, 1998)
Williams v. Comm'r
110 T.C. No. 4 (U.S. Tax Court, 1998)
Steven R. and Terry D. Williams v. Commissioner
110 T.C. No. 4 (U.S. Tax Court, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
110 T.C. No. 4, 110 T.C. 27, 1998 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 4, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-commr-tax-1998.