GARY R. FRINK, SHERRY R. FRINK, PETITIONERS-APPELLEES,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT (TWO CASES); GARY R. FRINK, SHERRY R. FRINK, PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS, V. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the requirements for a genuine agency relationship for federal income tax purposes were met, vacating its prior judgment and affirming the Tax Court's decision.
Taxpayers deducted partnership losses from a hotel operation, with a corporation (Argo) holding title as nominal debtor to avoid interest rate limitat…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Federal Income Tax cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
In this tax dispute, the taxpayers deducted their distributive share of partnership losses derived from the operation of a hotel during the years 1975-77. Record title to the hotel was held by Argo, a corporation which served as the nominal debtor at the lender’s request in order to avoid Mississippi’s limitation on interest charged to non-corporate borrowers. The Commissioner disallowed the deductions, but the Tax Court held that Argo was the partnership’s corporate agent and that the taxpayers could therefore deduct their distributive share of Argo’s losses. This court reversed that portion of the Tax Court’s judgment. Frink v. Commissioner, 798 F. 2d 106 (4th Cir.1986).
The Supreme Court vacated this court’s judgment, 56 U.S.L.W. 3665 (March 28, 1988), and remanded for further consideration in light of Commissioner v. Bollinger, — U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 1173, 99 L.Ed.2d 357 (1988). In Bollinger, the Court held that a genuine agency relationship existed for federal income tax purposes
when the fact that the corporation is acting as agent for its shareholders with respect to a particular asset is set forth in a written agreement at the time the asset is acquired, the corporation functions as agent and not principal with respect to the asset for all purposes, and the corporation is held out as the agent and not principal in all dealings with third parties relating to the asset.
— U.S. at -, 108 S.Ct. at 1179.
After reconsidering this case in light of Bollinger, we conclude that these requirements for a genuine agency relationship have been met. Our judgment reversing the Tax Court on this issue is vacated. The judgment of the Tax Court is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Bollinger, 485 U.S. 340 (U.S. 1988)
- Frink v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue, 798 F.2d 106 (4th Cir. 1986)