1979 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 112">*112
72 T.C. 386">*386 The respondent determined a deficiency in the Federal income tax of the petitioner for the calendar year 1966, in the amount of $ 369,916.79.
As a result of an agreement by the parties, the only issue for decision is whether certain capital gains realized by the petitioner during the year 1966 are subject to United States income tax pursuant to
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts have been stipulated. The stipulation of facts and the exhibits attached thereto are incorporated herein by this reference.
During 1966, petitioner was an Italian national resident in Switzerland. He was neither a citizen nor resident of the United States at any time.
Petitioner was a stockholder of Export-Import Woolens, Inc., a United States corporation engaged in the business of importing into and selling in the United States silks, woolens, and other 72 T.C. 386">*387 fabrics. Petitioner owned 18.6 percent of the stock of the corporation.
On or before May 2, 1966, the stockholders of Export-Import Woolens, Inc., duly adopted the required resolutions for the liquidation of the corporation. Pursuant thereto, there were distributed to the petitioner 33,549 shares of stock 1979 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 112">*115 of Hart Schaffner & Marx, having a value of $ 1,266,864.43, and other assets having a value of $ 120,900. The total value of the property received by the petitioner in the liquidation was $ 1,387,584.43. Petitioner's adjusted basis for his stock of the corporation was $ 9,300. He realized long-term capital gain on the liquidation of $ 1,378,284.43.
On May 2, 1966, the former stockholders (together with certain employees) of the corporation formed Export-Import Woolens Co., a New York limited partnership, of which the petitioner became a limited partner with an 11.4-percent interest. The partnership succeeded to the business of the corporation. Petitioner did not participate in the conduct of the business of the partnership.
On or before May 6, 1966, petitioner sold 25,000 shares of stock of Hart Schaffner & Marx received in the liquidation of Export-Import Woolens, Inc. He realized $ 1,014,104.49 on the sale. His basis for such shares was $ 943,906.25. He realized short-term capital gain of $ 70,198.24.
Petitioner was not in the United States for a period or periods aggregating 90 days or more during the calendar year 1966. He was not present in the United States on May 2, 1979 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 112">*116 1966, or May 6, 1966.
Petitioner filed a timely United States nonresident alien income tax return (Form 1040B) for the calendar year 1966 with the District Director of Internal Revenue for the Manhattan District of New York. The return reported income of $ 12,394.96 from the partnership. The petitioner paid the tax shown on the return to be due.
In respondent's notice of deficiency, he determined that for the taxable year 1966, petitioner was subject to tax in the United States as a nonresident alien doing business in the United States within the meaning of
OPINION
The sole question presented for decision is whether petitioner, a nonresident alien, is taxable on the gain realized from the distribution and subsequent sale of 25,000 shares of the stock of Hart Schaffner & Marx received by petitioner as a stockholder of Export-Import Woolens, Inc. On reopening the record1979 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 112">*117 in this case, petitioner sought to show that the distribution of the stock was made prior to such time that the petitioner was "doing business in the United States" as a partner in Export-Import Woolens Co., which was formed on May 2, 1966. Respondent contends that petitioner has failed to meet that burden. Respondent further contends that pursuant to the applicable statute and regulations it is immaterial.
Upon the basis of the record in this case, the Court is unable to find that on the date there was distributed to the petitioner the stock in question the petitioner was not a member of a partnership doing business in the United States on account of which petitioner would be taxable on all income realized thereafter from United States sources. Other than the stipulated date of "May 2, 1966," the record fails to show when the stock was actually distributed to the petitioner. Petitioner was not physically present in the United States when the distribution was made. A brother, petitioner's only witness, acted for petitioner under a power of attorney. He did not present any evidence from which it could be determined when the petitioner either actually or constructively received1979 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 112">*118 the stock.
1979 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 112">*119
For purposes of this subtitle, a nonresident alien individual shall be considered as being engaged in a trade or business within the United States if the partnership of which he is a member is so engaged.
The language of the statute first appeared in section 219 of the Revenue Act of 1936. The reports of the committees of the Congress accompanying the 1936 Act are silent with respect to the applicability of that rule to transactions occurring prior to the time that the taxpayer met the conditions prescribed therein. However,
For purposes of taxation, the nonresident alien who qualifies for taxation under
The fact that petitioner was "doing business in the United States" as a limited partner rather than in his individual capacity is not distinguishable for purposes of
When viewed in this light,
Accordingly, the gains realized by petitioner on the receipt of Hart Schaffner & Marx stock in liquidation of Export-Import 72 T.C. 386">*391 Woolens, Inc., and1979 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 112">*123 the subsequent sale of that stock are taxable under
1. All statutory references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as in effect in 1966, unless otherwise indicated.↩
2. Petitioner's original brief states at p. 7:
"The respondent nevertheless contends that
3. A different treatment might also have been inconsistent with the rationale of the rule under the 1939 Code whereby the income of the partnership became the income of the partner on the last day of the taxable year of the partnership.
4. Art. 219-1, Regs. 94 (1936); sec. 29.219-1, Regs. 111 (1942);