Lemishow v. Commissioner
Cases that cite this one
13 later published cases cite this decision.
- Robert Ancira v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 2002)
- Internal Revenue Service v. CM Holdings, Inc. (In re CM Holdings, Inc.) (United States District Court for the District of Delaware 2000)
- Estate of James E. Caan, Jacaan Administrative Trust, Scott Caan, Trustee, Special Administrator (United States Tax Court 2023)
- Estate of James E. Caan, Jacaan Administrative Trust, Scott Caan, Trustee, Special Administrator (United States Tax Court 2023)
- Zaklama v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2012)
- Albert Lemishow v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1998)
- Wendell Falls Development, LLC, Gregory Alan Ferguson, Tax Matters Partner v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 2018)
- 1982 East, LLC v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 2011)
- Karl L. Matthies and Deborah Matthies v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 2010)
- In re Williams (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2001)
- Michael G. Bunney v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 2000)
- Thomas J. Mitchell And Janice M. Mitchell v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 2000)
- Albert Lemishow v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1998)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
*10 Decision will be entered under Rule 155.
P received distributions from individual retirements accounts (IRA's) and Keogh accounts consisting solely of money. P purchased stock with a portion of the distributions. Thereafter, P opened a new IRA and placed the stock in that IRA within 60 days of receipt of the distributions.
HELD,
*110 OPINION
TANNENWALD, JUDGE: Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner's Federal income tax in the amount of $ 170,968 and an accuracy-related penalty under
(1) Whether petitioner's use of distributions from Keogh and individual retirement accounts (IRA's) to purchase stock which was contributed to an IRA constitutes a tax-free rollover contribution;
(2) whether petitioner received a taxable distribution of money not contributed to an IRA; and
(3) whether petitioner is liable for the accuracy-related penalty under
*111 This case was submitted fully stipulated under Rule 122. The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. Petitioner resided in Flushing, New York, at the time he filed the petition in this case. During 1993, petitioner was a self-employed accountant.
On December 13, 1993, petitioner completed a subscription agreement to purchase 30,000 shares of GP Financial Corp. stock at $ 15 a share for a total purchase price of $ 450,000. The Green Point Savings Bank*14 (Green Point) was responsible for taking the stock orders and payments for the subscription offering.
As of December 1993, petitioner maintained Keogh accounts and IRA's with Green Point and Apple Bank for Savings (Apple). On December 14, 1993, petitioner's account balances in the Keogh accounts and IRA's at Green Point totaled $ 327,252 and those at Apple totaled $ 165,695. On December 14, 1993, petitioner made the following withdrawals from his Keogh and IRA accounts (amounts rounded down to the nearest whole dollar):
| Type of | ||
| Bank | Amount | Account |
| Green Point | $ 250,651 | Keogh |
| Green Point | 50,130 | Keogh |
| Green Point | 13,939 | IRA |
| Apple | 153,828 | Keogh |
| Apple | 6,377 | IRA |
| Apple | 5,489 | IRA |
| Total | $ 480,414 |
Green Point and Apple withheld Federal income tax from the distributions of $ 50,130.00 and $ 153,828.00, respectively, in the amounts of $ 12,532.58 and $ 30,765.62, respectively.
Petitioner used the net Keogh and IRA distributions ($ 437,117) plus $ 12,883 of his own funds to pay the $ 450,000 purchase price of the GP Financial Corp. stock. On January 28, 1994, petitioner received 25,193 shares of GP Financial Corp. stock, not the*15 30,000 shares as per the subscription agreement. The 25,193 shares (the stock) at $ 15 per share cost $ 377,895. On January 29, 1984, petitioner received a stock purchase refund of $ 72,105 plus interest from Green Point.
On February 11, 1994, petitioner opened an IRA with Smith Barney Shearson (the Smith BarneyIRA). On February *112 11, 1994, petitioner deposited the stock into the Smith BarneyIRA.
Petitioner did not report any of the Keogh and IRA distributions on his 1993 Federal income tax return. Petitioner claimed a credit for the $ 43,298.20 in Federal income tax withheld by Green Point and Apple. Respondent determined that all $ 480,414 of the 1993 distributions (the net amount distributed plus withholding) from petitioner's Green Point and Apple and Keogh accounts were includable in petitioner's 1993 income.
Generally, any amount paid or distributed out of an IRA is included in gross income by the payee or distributee, as the case may be, in the manner provided in
As with IRA distributions, amounts distributed out of Keogh accounts generally are taxable in the year received under
(A) any portion of the balance to the credit of an employee in a qualified trust is paid to the employee in an eligible rollover distribution,
(B) the distributee transfers any portion of the property received in such distribution to an eligible retirement plan, and
(C) in the case of a distribution of property other than money, *17 the amount so transferred consists of the property distributed,
Respondent concedes that petitioner's IRA and Keogh distributions were eligible to be rolled over and that the Smith BarneyIRA was an eligible plan.
*113 It is clear from the above provisions that to the extent that petitioner did not reinvest the IRA and Keogh distributions ($ 480,414 received less $ 377,895 in stock, or $ 102,519), those portions are taxable, and we so hold. Whether the portions of the IRA and Keogh distributions used to purchase the stock are excludable from income turns on whether the respective rollover provisions of
Both rollover provisions were enacted as part of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, Pub. L. 93-406, sec. 2002(b), (g)(5), 88 Stat. 829, 959-964, 968-969. 2The purpose of allowing a tax-free rollover from a retirement plan to an IRA was to facilitate portability of pensions. Conf. Rept. 93-1280 (1974), 1974-
Based on the language of the statutory provisions and the legislative histories of those provisions, we hold that petitioner's use of the distributions from his Keogh and IRA's to purchase stock which he then contributed to the Smith BarneyIRA does not constitute a tax-free rollover contribution under*19
*114
Since this is the first time we have considered the rollover requirements as to the specific character of the property to be transferred, we find for petitioner as to the negligence penalty imposed on the portion of the underpayment attributable to the distributions used to purchase the stock. The record contains no facts pertaining to petitioner's failure to report any portion of the distributions. Thus, we find petitioner liable for the negligence penalty imposed on the portion of the underpayment attributable to the $ 102,519 not used to purchase the stock.
In keeping with the above holdings,
Decision will be entered under Rule 155.
Footnotes
1. Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the taxable year at issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.↩
2. These provisions enacted
sec. 402(a)(5) , which is the predecessor ofsec. 402(c)↩ .3. We note that a limited exception to the requirement of a tax-free rollover, that the same property distributed be contributed by the recipient to a qualified plan, was enacted in 1978. See
sec. 402(a)(6)(D) (nowsec. 402(c)(6) ), added by the Revenue Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95-600, sec. 157(f)(1), 92 Stat. 2763, 2806. This exception permitted property distributed to be sold and the proceeds contributed during the 60-day period. The narrow scope of this section is reflected in Staff of Joint Comm. on Taxation, General Explanation of the Revenue Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95-600, at 110 (J. Comm. Print 1979). See alsoRev. Rul. 87-77, 1987-2 C.B. 115↩ .
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.