This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Collector of Internal Revenue Facts: The case is an appeal from the decision of the Court of Tax Appeals imposing a tax deficiency liability of P1,317,629.61 on Liddell & Co., Inc. The petitioner, Liddell & Co. Inc., (Liddell & Co. for short) is a domestic corporation establish in the Philippines on February 1, 1946. From 1946 until November 22, 1948 when the purpose clause of the Articles of Incorporation of Liddell & Co. Inc., was amended so as to limit its business activities to importations of automobiles and trucks, Liddell & Co. was engaged in business as an importer and at the same time retailer of Oldsmobile and Chevrolet passenger cars and GMC and Chevrolet trucks. On December 20, 1948, the Liddell Motors, Inc. was organized and registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission with an authorized capital stock of P100,000 of which P20,000 was subscribed and paid for as follows: Irene Liddell wife of Frank Liddell 19,996 shares and Messrs. Marcial P. Lichauco, E. K. Bromwell, V. E. del Rosario and Esmenia Silva, 1 share each. Beginning January, 1949, Liddell & Co. stopped retailing cars and trucks; it conveyed them instead to Liddell Motors, Inc. which in turn sold the vehicles to the public with a steep mark-up. Since then, Liddell & Co. paid sales taxes on the basis of its sales to Liddell Motors Inc. considering said sales as its original sales. The Collector of Internal Revenue argued that the Lidell Motors, Inc. was but an alter ego of Liddell & Co. and concluded that for sales tax purposes, those sales made by Liddell Motors, Inc. to the public were considered as the original sales of Liddell & Co. hence the imposition of tax deficiency. Issue: Whether or not Lidell Motors, Inc. is an alter ego of Lidell& Co. making it liable for the said tax deficiency? Held: The Court held that Lidell Motors, Inc. is an alter ego of Lidell& Co. hence makin it liable for tax deficiency based on the principle that to allow a taxpayer to deny tax liability on the ground that the sales were made through an other and distinct corporation when it is proved that the latter is virtually owned by the former or that they are practically one and the same is to sanction a circumvention of our tax laws which is consistent with the view of the US Supreme Court stating in one case that "a taxpayer may gain advantage of doing business thru a corporation if he pleases, but the revenue officers in proper cases, may disregard the separate corporate entity where it serves but as a shield for tax evasion and treat the person who actually may take the benefits of the transactions as the person accordingly taxable." The bulk of the business of Liddell & Co. was channeled through Liddell Motors, Inc. On the other hand, Liddell Motors, Inc. pursued no activities except to secure cars, trucks, and spare parts from Liddell & Co. Inc. and then sell them to the general public. These sales of vehicles by Liddell & Co. to Liddell Motors, Inc. for the most part were shown to have taken place on the same day that Liddell Motors, Inc. sold such vehicles to the public. We may even say that the cars and trucks merely touched the hands of Liddell Motors, Inc. as a matter of formality.
retiring or separating.e. (2) that all certificates of stock in the names of the employees should be deposited with Frank Liddell duly indorsed in blank by the employees concerned. The alleged sale of her property in Oregon might have been true.: (1) Frank Liddell had the authority to designate in the future the employee who could receive earnings of the corporation. the said corporation should. etc. and 15% of the price if more than P5000 but not more than P7000. As to Liddell Motors. a peculiar consequence of the organization and activities of Liddell Motors. in this instant case. was the medium created by Liddell & Co. within a period of sixty days therefor. The income tax forms record no independent income of her own. the checks that represented her salary and bonus from Liddell Motors. And Liddell Motors. much less to operate an expensive trade like the retail of motor vehicles. Inc. to reduce the price and the tax liability. was progressive. She could hardly be said to possess business experience. Inc. to apportion among the stock holders the share in the profits. He supplied the original capital funds. Inc. As a matter of fact.000 initial subscription. had money of her own to pay for her P20. i. have the absolute and exclusive option to purchase and acquire the whole of the stock interest of the employees so dying. There is. 10% of the selling price of the car if it did not exceed P5000. This progressive rate of the sales tax naturally would tempt the taxpayer to employ a way of reducing the price of the first sale. Inc Frank Lidell also owned it. The evidence at hand also shows that Irene Liddell had scant participation in the affairs of Liddell Motors. In Lidell& Co. Her income in the United States in the years 1943 and 1944 and the savings therefrom could not be enough to cover the amount of subscription. are corporations owned and controlled by Frank Liddell directly or indirectly is not by itself sufficient to justify the disregard of the separate corporate identity of one from the other. found their way into the personal account of Frank Liddell.The mere fact that Liddell & Co. and Liddell Motors. 185 and 186 of the National Internal Revenue Code). Under the law in force at the time of its incorporation the sales tax on original sales of cars (sections 184. resigning. Inc. Inc. It is not proven that his wife Irene. (3) that each employee was required to sign an agreement with the corporation to the effect that. ostensibly the sole incorporator of Liddell Motors. Inc. upon his death or upon his retirement or separation for any cause whatsoever from the corporation. but the money received therefrom was never shown to have been saved or deposited so as to be still available at the time of the organization of the Liddell Motors. Her frequent absences from the country negate any active participation in the affairs of the Motors company. Inc. . however.