O.B.M. adopted a plan of complete liquidation on June 23, 1961. On June 23, 1962, O.B.M. retained assets in excess of those needed to meet its claims.
1. The petitioners have failed to prove that O.B.M. made a diligent attempt to determine what assets needed to be retained to meet claims and to distribute the rest of its assets, and accordingly,
2. The individual stockholders are liable as transferees for the deficiency found against O.B.M.
52 T.C. 619">*619 The respondent determined deficiencies in the income tax of the corporate petitioner, O.B.M., Inc., as follows:
T.Y.E. | |
Dec. 31 -- | Deficiency |
1961 | $ 37,679.73 |
1962 | 18,815.00 |
1963 | 7,100.00 |
Total | 63,594.73 |
The respondent further determined that each of the individual petitioners is liable, as a transferee of O.B.M., Inc., for the total amount of the deficiencies asserted against O.B.M., Inc., $ 63,594.73, plus interest. The principal issue presented is whether all the assets of O.B.M., Inc., except for assets 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*96 retained to meet claims, were distributed within 12 months of its adoption of a plan of complete liquidation, so that, under
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts have been stipulated, and those facts are so found. O.B.M., Inc. (O.B.M.), was organized under the laws of the State 52 T.C. 619">*620 of New York in 1906. Although the company was known by different names during its existence, we shall refer to it consistently as O.B.M. Its corporate income tax returns for the taxable years 1961, 1962, 1963, and 1964 were filed with the district director of internal revenue, Manhattan, New York. Its principal office was in New York City, N.Y., at the time its petition was filed in this case.
Each of the individual petitioners had his legal residence within the State of New York at the time his petition was filed 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*97 in this case. At all times relevant to the issues herein, the individual petitioners owned stock in O.B.M. as follows:
Shareholdings | ||
Docket No. | Name | percent |
4486-65 | Burton O'Brien | 50 |
4487-65 | Gerard M. McAllister | 12 1/2 |
4488-65 | Anthony J. McAllister | 12 1/2 |
4489-65 | James P. McAllister | 12 1/2 |
4490-65 | Roderick H. McAllister | 6 1/4 |
4491-65 | Charles D. McAllister | 6 1/4 |
Prior to 1958, O.B.M.'s principal business was contract dredging of boat slips in New York Harbor and towing of scows and equipment. On or about June 19, 1958, O.B.M. ceased all dredging operations and sold all of its operating equipment and properties, except for the tug
O.B.M. chartered the tug,
On June 23, 1961, at a special joint meeting of stockholders and directors, a plan of complete liquidation of O.B.M. was adopted. Under the plan, O.B.M. was to sell all of its salable assets and distribute to its stockholders, within a 12-month period from the date of the plan, the sale proceeds and its other assets, "less such assets, if any, as may be necessary to meet * * * [O.B.M.'s] claims." On June 26, 1961, O.B.M.'s board of directors met and resolved that the 52 T.C. 619">*621 corporation be dissolved under
On June 23, 1961, the 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*99 balance sheet of O.B.M. reflected the following assets and liabilities:
TABLE I | ||
Assets | ||
Cash in bank | $ 29,359.69 | |
Accounts receivable | 8,087.89 | |
Claims receivable | 12,507.39 | |
Investment in U.S. Treasury bills | 198,810.00 | |
Accrued interest receivable, U.S. Treasury bills | 400.98 | |
Investment in preferred stock, Tidewater Dredging Corp | 418,000.00 | |
Investent in common stock, Tidewater Dredging Corp | 189,637.46 | |
Investment in stock, Mersick Industries (16,236 shares) | 50,000.00 | |
Investment in O'Brien-Quist, joint venture | 39,937.90 | |
Floating equipment tug, DuBois II | $ 229,720.43 | |
Less reserve for depreciation | 210,104.91 | |
19,615.52 | ||
Total | 966,356.83 | |
Liabilities | ||
Accounts payable | 875.00 | |
Miscellaneous taxes payable | 545.09 | |
Liability for damage claims | 1,750.00 | |
Total | 3,170.09 |
Between June 23, 1961, and June 22, 1962, O.B.M. made cash distributions to its stockholders totaling $ 1,127,000. 3 In addition, on June 19, 1962, O.B.M. caused its 16,236 shares of stock in Mersick Industries, Inc., valued at $ 2.50 per share for Federal tax stamp purposes, to be transferred to its stockholders in proportion to their O.B.M. stockholdings.
On June 23, 1962, O.B.M. had assets, ascertained in existence and value, totaling $ 5,099, consisting 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*100 of $ 3,913 in cash and $ 1,186 in insurance claims. It had liabilities ascertained as to existence and amount totaling $ 2,250, consisting of accounts payable of $ 1,000 and provision for damage claims in excess of insurance coverage of $ 1,250. In addition, as a result of its participation in a joint venture, described more fully later, O.B.M. was liable for a judgment which New York City had obtained against the joint venture for unpaid general business tax. This judgment was for $ 4,416.61 plus interest from the date of 52 T.C. 619">*622 the judgment, which amounted to approximately $ 1,300 on June 23, 1962.
Also on that date, O.B.M. owned the tugboat
In October 1962, at a pretrial conference, Mr. Foreman offered to settle the case for $ 40,000, and the City refused. The judge thereupon strongly urged the attorneys for O.B.M. and the City to obtain authorization from their respective principals to settle the case for $ 25,000. Thereafter sometime prior to December 1963, the parties finally agreed to settle the case for $ 25,000. On account of this settlement, O.B.M., on May 20, 1964, received the net amount of $ 12,859.83. This amount 52 T.C. 619">*623 took into consideration a compromise of the City's judgment for business taxes and interest against O.B.M. This amount was computed as follows:
TABLE II | |||
Total settlement | $ 25,000.00 | ||
Less: | |||
Amount payable to New York City for business tax | |||
judgment plus interest | $ 4,751.67 | ||
Attorneys' fees (25% of recovery) | 6,250.00 | ||
Attorneys' expenses | 88.50 | ||
Due Messrs. Quist and Ferrugio (5% of | |||
recovery) | $ 1,250 | ||
Less amount previously paid | 200 | ||
1,050.00 | |||
12,140.17 | |||
Balance | 12,859.83 |
On June 30, 1961, Tidewater received from Great Lakes $ 2,136,000 on account of the sale of its assets. 5 Thereafter, O.B.M. received from Tidewater, prior to June 23, 1962, distributions totaling $ 834,060 on account of Tidewater's liquidation, the last distribution in that period being received on February 28, 1962. 6 None of the Tidewater shares 52 T.C. 619">*624 held by O.B.M. or any other of Tidewater's stockholders were ever surrendered as a result of the Tidewater liquidation.
As of February 28, 1962, after the liquidating distributions of that date, Tidewater's books reflected the following assets, liabilities, and stockholders' equity:
TABLE III | ||
Assets | ||
Cash in Grace National Bank | $ 3,440 | |
Accounts receivable | 90,909 | |
Federal income tax refund receivable | 14,342 | |
Insurance claims receivable | 12,338 | |
Deposit (collected Mar. 20, 1962) | 6,000 | |
Insurance premium refunds (collected Apr. 18, 1962) | 82 | |
Other receivables: | ||
Burton E. O'Brien | $ 936 | |
Robert M. Catherine, Jr | 606 | |
1,542 | ||
Total | 128,653 | |
Liabilities and stockholders' equity | ||
Accounts payable: | ||
Johnson & Higgins | 394 | |
Henry Brout & Co | 2,500 | |
$ 2,894 | ||
Taxes payable: | ||
Income tax withheld from employee | 3,063 | |
New York City excise tax on gross receipts | 2,180 | |
State franchise taxes (estimated) | 1,000 | |
6,243 | ||
Accrued expenses: | ||
Workmen's compensation insurance in connection with | ||
Verrazano Bridge contract | 1,936 | |
Various in connection with Judi Bob claim | 1,264 | |
3,200 | ||
Estimated liability for damage claim (in excess of insurance coverage) | 500 | |
Total liabilities | 12,837 | |
Stockholders' equity | 115,816 | |
Total | 128,653 |
1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*105 Tidewater's annual report for the fiscal year ending February 28, 1962, stated that this balance sheet, which shows stockholders' equity in the amount of $ 115,816, did not reflect certain contingent liabilities, viz, additional retroactive workman's compensation premiums of approximately $ 51,000; liability to the owner of the vessel
Subsequent to February 28, 1962, the Federal taxing authorities denied certain deductions claimed on Tidewater's 1962 income tax return and asserted a deficiency of approximately $ 30,000 plus interest. The Federal tax claims against Tidewater were settled sometime during 1963. Also in 1963, the workmen's compensation liability was settled for an amount less than the anticipated $ 51,000. On February 28, 1963, Tidewater made a distribution to its stockholders of which O.B.M. received $ 28,400. In 1964, Tidewater satisfied its liability arising out of the damage to the
On March 1, 1963, O.B.M., following the receipt of the $ 28,400 distribution from Tidewater, distributed $ 28,000 to its stockholders. On July 10, 1964, O.B.M. filed a certificate of dissolution with the secretary of state of New York, distributed its remaining assets to Mr. McAllister as trustee in liquidation for O.B.M., and went out of existence.
Between 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*107 July 16, 1964, and September 7, 1966, the following deposits were made in a checking account in the name of Gerard M. McAllister, as trustee in liquidation for O.B.M.:
TABLE IV | ||
Date | Item | Amount |
7/16/64 | Recovery on claim for joint venture | $ 12,859.83 |
O'Brien Bros. -- Quist bank account 1 | 463.25 | |
O.B.M. account | 2,575.41 | |
10/26/64 | Refund New Jersey franchise tax | 50.00 |
12/10/64 | Tidewater distribution | 7,500.00 |
2/3/66 | Wm. B. McConnell -- deposit on sale of DuBois II | 2,000.00 |
9/7/66 | Final Tidewater distribution | 553.66 |
Total | 26,002.15 |
52 T.C. 619">*626 On July 20, 1964, Mr. McAllister, as trustee in liquidation for O.B.M., distributed $ 15,000 to O.B.M.'s stockholders, which amount consists, in part, of the proceeds of the settlement of the joint venture claim against New York City. On September 14, 1965, he distributed, as trustee, $ 4,000 to O.B.M.'s stockholders, so that they could pay attorneys' fees arising out of the present proceeding. As of the date of the trial in this case, the checking account in the name of Mr. McAllister, as trustee in liquidation for O.B.M., showed a balance of $ 8,339, which amount was retained in that account to pay the costs of the present proceeding, including possible appeals.
The 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*108 following table summarizes the distributions received by O.B.M. from Tidewater and the cash distributions it made to its stockholders:
TABLE V | ||
Distributions | Cash distributions | |
Date | by Tidewater | by |
to O.B.M. | O.B.M. to | |
its stockholders | ||
During 12-month period: | ||
July 13, 1961 | $ 418,000 | |
July 14, 1961 | $ 500,000 | |
July 31, 1961 | 241,400 | 240,000 |
Aug. 25, 1961 | 200,000 | |
Sept. 5, 1961 | 99,400 | |
Sept. 21, 1961 | 100,000 | |
Feb. 28, 1962 | 75,260 | |
Mar. 1, 1962 | 75,000 | |
June 19, 1962 | 12,000 | |
Total during 12-month period | 834,060 | 1,127,000 |
After 12-month period: | ||
Feb. 28, 1963 | 28,400 | |
Mar. 1, 1963 | 28,000 | |
July 20, 1964 1 | 2 15,000 | |
Dec. 9, 1964 | 7,500 | |
Sept. 14, 1965 | 4,000 | |
Sept. 6, 1966 | 554 | |
Total after 12-month period | 36,454 | 47,000 |
Grand total | 870,514 | 1,174,000 |
From 1961 through 1965, the individual petitioners received the following cash amounts in liquidation of their stockholdings in O.B.M.:
TABLE VI | |
Burton O'Brien | $ 587,000 |
James P. McAllister | 146,750 |
Gerard M. McAllister | 146,750 |
Anthony J. McAllister | 146,750 |
Roderick H. McAllister | 73,375 |
Charles D. McAllister | 73,375 |
Total | 1,174,000 |
OPINION
While 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*109 O.B.M. was in the process of liquidation, it received liquidating distributions from Tidewater in excess of its basis in the Tidewater52 T.C. 619">*627 stock. The question presented is whether O.B.M. has met the requirements of
(a) General Rule. -- If -- (1) a corporation adopts a plan of complete liquidation on or after June 22, 1954, and (2) within the 12-month period beginning on the date of the adoption of such plan, all of the assets of the corporation are distributed in complete liquidation, less assets retained to meet claims,
The answer depends on whether O.B.M. distributed within the 12-month period all of its assets "less those retained to meet claims." 71969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*110
It is undisputed that O.B.M. did not distribute all of its assets within 12 months of the adoption of the plan of complete liquidation. On June 23, 1962, it still had assets consisting of cash and insurance claims totaling $ 5,100, the tug
The question, then, is why the claim against New York City arising out of the joint venture and the Tidewater stock were not distributed. The petitioners argue that O.B.M., when it adopted its plan of liquidation, directed Mr. McAllister and Mr. Riso to distribute all its assets within 12 months except 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*111 for those retained to meet claims; that these gentlemen did undertake to distribute all the corporate assets and did in fact distribute substantially all of them within the 12-month period; that in good faith they believed the claim and the stock to be worthless on June 22, 1962, and did not distribute them for that reason; and that
The petitioners' contention that the claim against the City was worthless rests on the testimony of Mr. McAllister that he considered 52 T.C. 619">*628 it worthless in 1962. However, in 1958, the City offered to settle the suit for $ 15,000. O.B.M.'s attorney, who was asking $ 70,000 in settlement, refused this offer, but the City did not withdraw it. At all times until October 1962, the City's offer remained open, and the case could have been settled for that amount. O.B.M. continued to ask for $ 70,000 until October 1962 when it made a settlement offer of $ 40,000. At a pretrial conference in October 1962, the judge urged the parties to settle the case for $ 25,000 and set in motion the machinery which led to actual settlement for that amount in 1963. On the basis of these facts, 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*112 the conclusion is inescapable that as of June 23, 1962, the case had a minimum settlement value of no less than $ 15,000. Taking into account witness and attorney fees and expenses to be deducted from any settlement, the lawsuit had a minimum cash value of at least $ 10,500.
The petitioners argue that whatever the lawsuit's actual value, Mr. McAllister held a good-faith belief that it was without value and that this good-faith belief is sufficient justification under
On the basis of the record before us, we believe that the petitioners have failed to prove that a good-faith attempt was made to comply with the requirements of
The Tidewater stock presents a slightly different situation. The petitioners contend that this asset also was worthless on June 22, 1962, inasmuch as Tidewater itself had just completed a 12-month liquidation pursuant to
Even if it is assumed that by June 23, 1962, Tidewater had distributed all of its assets except those retained to meet claims, within the requirements of
In the alternative, the petitioners attempt to justify the retention of the claim against the City and the Tidewater stock on the basis that they were needed to meet contingent claims against O.B.M. However, this position is inconsistent with the testimony of Mr. McAllister and Mr. 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 95">*117 Riso that they considered the claim and the stock to be worthless -- 52 T.C. 619">*630 if they were worthless, then there was no reason to retain them to meet claims. In addition, the petitioners have failed to prove the amounts of the contingent claims or that they made any reasonable effort to ascertain such amounts. At trial and on brief, the petitioners contend that O.B.M. had contingent claims outstanding against it consisting of liquidating expenses, insurance on the tug
The petitioners contend that the respondent is attempting to penalize O.B.M. and its stockholders for the fact that Mr. McAllister and Mr. Riso exercised "conservative" judgment in valuing its assets and determining the amount necessary to meet claims; that is not the ground of our holding. We are not concerned with the business philosophy underlying the business judgment; the question is whether any serious judgment, based on facts ascertained as well as possible, was made at all with respect to the retention of assets to meet claims; and our holding is based upon the petitioners' failure to prove that any such judgment was exercised.
In conclusion, we hold that O.B.M. has not met the requirements of
The respondent has asserted transferee liability under
The amounts paid to the individual petitioners as liquidating distributions were without full and adequate consideration; each distribution 52 T.C. 619">*631 was one of a series of distributions in complete liquidation which left O.B.M. insolvent. See
1. Cases of the following petitioners are consolidated herewith: Burton O'Brien, docket No. 4486-65; Gerard M. McAllister, docket No. 4487-65; Anthony J. McAllister, docket No. 4488-65; James P. McAllister, docket No. 4489-65; Roderick H. McAllister, docket No. 4490-65; and Charles D. McAllister, docket No. 4491-65.↩
2. All statutory references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, unless otherwise indicated.↩
3. See Table V,
4. "Tidewater" as used herein refers to "Tidewater Dredging Corp." or "United Maritime Associates, Inc.," as the case may be.
5. The record does not disclose how, when, or whether Tidewater received the other $ 14,000 from Great Lakes.↩
6. See Table V,
1. Uncashed checks.↩
1. O.B.M. formally dissolved July 10, 1964. Thereafter, receipts and disbursements were managed by Mr. McAllister as trustee in liquidation for O.B.M.↩
2. On May 20, 1964, O.B.M. received $ 12,859.83 in settlement of the joint venture's lawsuit against New York City.↩
7. The parties agree that O.B.M.'s gain on the Tidewater liquidation is the sort of gain which may go unrecognized under
8. Because of our conclusion that