10.2 Tax Refund SuitsDebt vs. Equity The question you must decide in this case is whether the
advances made to the Plaintiff corporation by its stockholders created a
bona fide indebtedness, that is, were true loans, or whether they were
made in fact as investments in the capital of the corporation. The
difference between a loan and an investment is important because
under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, a corporation may
deduct from its gross income, for income tax purposes, any amounts
paid by it as interest on money that it has borrowed, but it may not
deduct other payments such as a distribution of dividends made by it to
its shareholders. The fact that the amount paid is taxable in either event,
to the people who received the payment, does not matter. In this case
the Commissioner of Internal Revenue took the position that the
advances made by the stockholders to the Plaintiff were investments in
the capital of the corporation, and, therefore, that the payments made
by the Plaintiff to its stockholders represented dividend distributions
rather than interest payments. As a result, the deductions claimed by
the Plaintiff for the payment of this amount as interest were disallowed.
The Defendant has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the
evidence, that the Commissioner's determination was correct. Of
course, a person may be an investor and a creditor in the same
corporation at the same time, but, as I shall explain later, status as one
or the other is not necessarily determined by the label that is attached to
the transaction or series of transactions. An investment in capital is an
advance made to a corporation by a stockholder or stockholders as an
investment for the purpose of making a profit dependent upon and
measured by the future success of the business. In other words, the
stockholder making the advance intends to make an investment and
take the risks of the venture.Repayment is not agreed to by the corporation and the investor
anticipates a return out of future profits of the enterprise. A return is by
no means certain, however, since an investment in capital is similar to
any other investment that is dependent upon future profits and earnings.
A loan is an advance of money pursuant to an agreement, either
express or implied, that the money will be repaid at some future date.
The agreement to repay must be absolute, that is, payable in any event.
Of course, the lender takes the risk that the corporation may not be able
to repay, but the borrower’s legal obligation to repay continues to exist
without regard to financial ability or corporate profits and earnings. In
general, the essential difference between a stockholder who makes an
investment in capital, and a creditor who merely loans money to the
corporation, is that the stockholder's intention is to embark upon the
corporate venture as one of the owners, taking the risks of loss involved
so as to enjoy the chances of profit; whereas the creditor, on the other
hand, does not intend to be an owner or to take such risks so far as they
may be avoided, and intends merely to lend money to others who intend
to take the risk.There is no single factor or test to be applied in making the decision of
whether advances by stockholders to a corporation should be
considered as loans or investments in capital. You must consider all of
the facts of the case; and you must consider the true substance of the
transaction, not its form. Names and labels are not determinative- - the fact that the advances are called loans or take the form of
inforceable legal obligations under state law is not controlling. The
substance, and not the form, is the important thing. A transaction must
be examined, for income tax purposes, in terms of what was intended to
be accomplished and what was actually accomplished, not from the
names or titles or forms used by the parties. Thus, while no single
factor should be regarded as decisive, there are a number of things you
may consider.One factor you may consider is the presence or absence of a maturity
date. The presence of a fixed maturity date indicates a fixed obligation
to repay, and is a characteristic of a debt obligation. On the other hand,
the absence of a fixed maturity date might indicate that repayment was
in some way tied to the fortunes of the business, and would be
indicative of an equity advance.A related consideration is whether there was an expectation of payment
at maturity. If there was such an expectation, that would be an indication
of the existence of a debt. On the other hand, if there is no good
expectation of payment at maturity, or if there is an unreasonably
postponed due date on the note representing the advance, then that
would be an indication that the advance was intended to be investment.Another factor for you to consider is whether the advances made by the
stockholders were used for the purpose of buying capital assets [such
as machinery] that are essential to the long-range conduct of the
business, or whether the advances were merely for current operating
expenses. If the advances were for current operating expenses, this
might indicate that they were intended to be a loan. If the advances
made by the shareholders were made to purchase assets essential to
the long-range conduct of the business, this might indicate an
investment in capital rather than a loan.If the corporation established a sinking fund (that is, a fund in which
money is accumulated to permit a loan to be paid off when it becomes
due), did not have the notes of the stockholder subordinated to other
indebtedness, and never prevailed upon its stockholders to postpone or
forego payments as they became due of amounts that they termed
principal, or interest, this would indicate that there was a good
expectation of payment at maturity - - that the transaction was a true
loan. On the other hand, if the corporation did not establish a sinking
fund, did have its stockholders' notes subordinated to other creditors,
and did have its stockholders postpone the payments required by the
notes, this would indicate that there was no good expectation of
payment at maturity - - that the transaction was an investment.Another factor that you may consider is the source of the payments. If
repayment is possible only out of corporate earnings, the transaction
has the appearance of a contribution of equity capital. If, however,
repayment is not dependent upon earnings, the transaction reflects a
loan to the corporation.Another factor that you may consider is the right to enforce repayment.
If there is a definite obligation to repay the advance, then this is an
indication of the existence of a debt.Another factor that you may consider is an increase in participation in
management. If the contributors were granted an increased voting
power or participation in the affairs of the corporation by virtue of the
advance, this would indicate that the advance was intended to be an
investment. If, on the other hand, the contributors were not granted any
increased voting power or participation in the corporation's affairs by
virtue of the advance, this would indicate the existence of a debt. Another factor that you may consider is how other creditors were treated
by the corporation. If they were paid on a date certain, upon maturity of
the corporation's obligation to them, but advances to the corporation by
its stockholders were not so paid, this indicates that the advances by
the stockholders were capital investments, and not true indebtedness.Another factor that you may consider is whether there was "thin" or
inadequate capitalization. Thin capitalization is evidence of a capital
contribution where (1) the debt to equity ratio was initially high, (2) the
parties realized the likelihood that it would go higher, and (3) substantial
portions of these funds were used for the purpose of capital assets and
for meeting expenses needed to commence operations. As specifically
concerns the debt to equity ratio, you should keep in mind that if the
amount of the debt is much higher, or several times higher, than the
amount of capital stock, this would tend to indicate that the advances in
question were capital investments. If the amount of debt is more nearly
equal to, or is less than, the amount of capital stock, this would tend to
indicate that the advances represented true indebtedness.Another factor that you should keep in mind is that if the corporation
makes its interest payments but does not pay cash dividends, although
it has earnings available for this purpose, this is a factor that may
indicate that the advances are capital investment rather than debt. On
the other hand, payment of dividends under such circumstances may
indicate that the advances are true loans. Also, if the corporation makes
so called "interest" payments that are paid only when profits are
available, this would indicate a capital investment; if interest payments
are made regularly, whether profits are available or not, a true loan is
indicated.Another factor that you may consider is the identity of interests between
creditor and stockholder. If advances are made by stockholders in
proportion to their respective stock ownership, an equity capital
contribution is indicated. A sharply disproportionate ratio between a
stockholder's percentage interest in stock and debt is, however, strongly
indicative that the debt is bona fide.Another factor that you may consider is the ability of the corporation to
obtain loans from outside lending institutions. If a corporation is able to
borrow funds from outside sources at the time an advance is made, the
transaction has the appearance of a bona fide indebtedness. If no
reasonable creditor would have loaned funds to the corporation at the
time of the advance, an inference arises that a reasonable shareholder
would likewise not so act, and the transaction has the appearance of an
investment in capital.
As stated before, no single factor or consideration is controlling your
decision should be made on the basis of all the evidence in thecase.VERDICT[A general verdict form will usually suffice]ANNOTATIONS AND COMMENTSSee the Annotations and Comments following Federal Claims Instruction 10.1,
supra.
Helpful advice on finalizing your ‘S Corp Vs C Corp Differences Ampamp Benefitsbizfilings’ online
Are you fed up with the inconvenience of managing paperwork? Look no further than airSlate SignNow, the leading electronic signature platform for individuals and small to medium-sized businesses. Say farewell to the monotonous task of printing and scanning documents. With airSlate SignNow, you can easily finalize and sign forms online. Take advantage of the powerful features integrated into this user-friendly and affordable service and transform your method of document handling. Whether you need to approve forms or collect eSignatures, airSlate SignNow makes it all simple, needing just a few clicks.
Follow this comprehensive guide:
- Sign in to your account or initiate a free trial with our service.
- Click +Create to upload a document from your device, cloud, or our template collection.
- Access your ‘S Corp Vs C Corp Differences Ampamp Benefitsbizfilings’ in the editor.
- Select Me (Fill Out Now) to set up the document on your end.
- Add and designate fillable fields for other participants (if needed).
- Proceed with the Send Invite settings to solicit eSignatures from others.
- Save, print your copy, or convert it into a multi-usable template.
No need to worry if you need to collaborate with your colleagues on your S Corp Vs C Corp Differences Ampamp Benefitsbizfilings or send it for notarization—our platform provides you with everything necessary to accomplish such tasks. Create an account with airSlate SignNow today and enhance your document management to extraordinary levels!