West Coast Marketing Corp. v. Commissioner
46 T.C. 32; 1966 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 118 (1966)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A transaction structured to meet the literal requirements of a tax-free reorganization will be disregarded if the intermediate corporate entity served no legitimate business purpose and was merely a conduit to facilitate a prearranged sale. The substance of the transaction, not its form, governs its tax consequences under the business purpose and step transaction doctrines.
Facts:
- West Coast Marketing Corp. (petitioner), whose sole stockholder was Max B. Cohen, owned a 25% undivided interest in a large parcel of land known as the Middle Tract.
- George Coury, who controlled other ownership interests in the Middle Tract and two adjacent tracts, negotiated the sale of all three tracts to Universal Marion Corp. (Universal).
- In March 1959, Coury and Universal reached an oral agreement for Universal to acquire the land in exchange for its preferred stock. Cohen was informed and authorized Coury to finalize the deal.
- On April 16, 1959, Universal sent a formal written offer to acquire the land for its stock, which Coury accepted on behalf of all owners after securing their consent.
- On April 30, 1959, after the sale agreement was in place, Cohen organized a new corporation, Manatee Land Co. (Manatee).
- On May 1, 1959, petitioner transferred its 25% interest in the Middle Tract to Manatee in exchange for Manatee stock.
- On October 27, 1959, to consummate the prearranged deal, petitioner and other Manatee shareholders exchanged all their Manatee stock for Universal preferred stock.
- Manatee was not engaged in any business and was liquidated by Universal shortly after the transaction.
Procedural Posture:
- West Coast Marketing Corp. filed its income tax return for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1960, reporting no taxable income from the exchange of Manatee stock for Universal stock.
- The Commissioner of Internal Revenue determined that the transaction was a taxable sale of property and assessed a tax deficiency against the petitioner for $50,911.97.
- West Coast Marketing Corp. (petitioner) challenged the deficiency by filing a petition in the Tax Court of the United States.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a transaction in which a taxpayer transfers property to a newly formed corporation, and then immediately exchanges that corporation's stock for the stock of an acquiring company as part of a prearranged plan, qualify as a tax-free reorganization under I.R.C. § 354, thereby allowing the taxpayer to avoid recognizing gain on the disposition of the property?
Opinions:
Majority - Raum, J.
No. A transaction in which a taxpayer transfers property to a newly formed corporation and then immediately exchanges that corporation's stock as part of a prearranged plan does not qualify as a tax-free reorganization. The court applied the 'substance over form' doctrine, established in cases like Gregory v. Helvering. It found that Manatee Land Co. was created solely as a 'conduit' to pass title of the land to Universal and to disguise what was, in substance, a taxable sale of land for stock as a tax-free stock-for-stock reorganization. Manatee served no legitimate business purpose; it was formed after the sale to Universal was already arranged and imminent. The court concluded that all the steps were component parts of a single, integrated transaction, the substance of which was a taxable disposition of petitioner's land interest to Universal.
Analysis:
This case is a classic application of the 'substance over form' and 'step transaction' doctrines in tax law. It reaffirms the principle from Gregory v. Helvering that literal compliance with the reorganization statutes is insufficient; a transaction must also have a legitimate business purpose to qualify for tax-free treatment. The decision serves as a warning to taxpayers that courts will look through artificially inserted steps, like the creation of a transitory corporation, to determine the true nature and tax consequences of a transaction. It reinforces that prearranged plans to dispose of assets cannot be disguised as tax-free reorganizations through clever, but hollow, structuring.
Unlock the full brief for West Coast Marketing Corp. v. Commissioner