The ruling in last week's Tax Court decision in the case of Crescent Holdings LLC is an important one. Arthur Fields had a 2% interest in Crescent Holdings(CH). The interest was not fully vested. In order for it to vest, Mr. Fields had to remain on as CEO of Crescent Resources , which was owned by CH, for three years. As it worked out, the interest never vested, so Mr. Fields argued that he should not recognize the income that flowed through to him from the CH in 2006 and 2007 - over $4...
Duke Energy's Billion Dollar Distribution May Be At Root Of Tax Court's Crescent Holding Decision
Forbes - 8 Dec 2013 22:14
The ruling in last week's Tax Court decision in the case of Crescent Holdings LLC is an important one. Arthur Fields had a 2% interest in Crescent Holdings(CH). The interest was not fully vested. In order for it to vest, Mr. Fields had to remain on as CEO of Crescent Resources , which was owned by CH, for three years. As it worked out, the interest never vested, so Mr. Fields argued that he should not recognize the income that flowed through to him from the CH in 2006 and 2007 - over $4...
Share this Article
Recommended