Zagfly, Inc. v. Comm'r

2013 T.C. Memo. 29, 105 T.C.M. 1214, 2013 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 31
United States Tax Court·Decided January 28, 2013·No. Docket No. 1494-12X·Unpublished

Opinion

ZAGFLY, INC., Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Zagfly, Inc. v. Comm'r
Docket No. 1494-12X
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 2013-29; 2013 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 31; 105 T.C.M. (CCH) 1214;
January 28, 2013, Filed
*31

Decision will be entered for respondent.

M. Renee Orth (an officer), for petitioner.
Mark Alan Weiner, Victoria A. Judson, Kirk M. Paxson, and Patricia P. Wang, for respondent.
GUY, Special Trial Judge.

GUY
MEMORANDUM OPINION

GUY, Special Trial Judge: Zagfly, Inc. (petitioner), submitted to respondent an application for recognition of exempt status under section *30 501(c)(3). 1 After exhausting its administrative remedies, petitioner filed a petition with the Court pursuant to section 7428(a) seeking a declaratory judgment that it qualifies as an organization described in section 501(c)(3) that is exempt from Federal income taxation pursuant to section 501(a). 2

The parties submitted this case to the Court for decision on the basis of the *32pleadings and the parties' stipulation as to the administrative record. SeeRules 122, 217(b)(1).

Background

Petitioner was organized as a California nonprofit corporation in March 2010. Petitioner's articles of incorporation state in part: "The specific purpose of this corporation is to establish Internet platforms that will enable the general public to direct the proceeds of their activities to charitable causes." M. Renee Orth is petitioner's president and chief executive officer. Petitioner has delayed *31 commencement of operations pending a final determination regarding its exempt status under section 501(a).

Petitioner plans to engage in an Internet-based business selling goods and services. Initially, petitioner intends to create a Web site and sell flowers as part of an established network of florists. 3 As a flower broker, petitioner anticipates that it will earn a sales commission of approximately 10% to 20% of the purchase price of the flowers it sells. Petitioner's Web site will feature approximately 40 different floral arrangements for purchase and delivery, and it expects to sell flowers at market rates, i.e., the price offered by other vendors participating in the florist *33network.

When customers purchase flowers from petitioner, they will be able to designate a charitable organization, from a list of organizations approved by petitioner, to receive all of the profit arising from the transaction. 4 Petitioner will approve an organization to receive a share of its profits only if the organization is exempt under section 501(c)(3). If this business model is established and viable, *32 petitioner hopes to expand its Web site offerings to include travel reservation services.

Petitioner plans to begin operations with an all volunteer workforce. However, assuming its business model is viable, petitioner intends to pay its employees reasonable salaries. Petitioner indicated that it would "suggest that our users allocate a small percentage (10% to 20%) of the profits (i.e., 1% to 2% of *34the purchase price) from their flower purchase to supporting our nonprofit. If we find that our users are not inclined to voluntarily elect to allocate funds to our organization, then we may need to include our operating expenses in determining the 'profit' that goes to the charitable cause of our users' choice". Petitioner's "goal is to cover all operating costs with philanthropic donations so that all user generated revenue * * * can be directed to the charitable causes our users wish to support."

Petitioner provided respondent with the following schedule projecting revenues and operating expenses for the years indicated:

*33Projected Statement of Re

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

Zagfly, Inc. v. Comm'r, 2013 T.C. Memo. 29, 105 T.C.M. 1214, 2013 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 31 (tax 2013).

2013 T.C. Memo. 29 (Zagfly, Inc. v. Comm'r) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bob Jones University v. United States
461 U.S. 574 (Supreme Court, 1983)
Commissioner v. Groetzinger
480 U.S. 23 (Supreme Court, 1987)
Nat'l Paralegal Inst. Coalition v. Comm'r
2005 T.C. Memo. 293 (U.S. Tax Court, 2005)
Church in Boston v. Commissioner
71 T.C. 102 (U.S. Tax Court, 1978)
B.H.W. Anesthesia Foundation, Inc. v. Commissioner
72 T.C. 681 (U.S. Tax Court, 1979)
Piety, Inc. v. Commissioner
82 T.C. No. 16 (U.S. Tax Court, 1984)
American Campaign Academy v. Commissioner
92 T.C. No. 66 (U.S. Tax Court, 1989)