Adams, through Adams' Colorado limited partnership, J.R.A. First, during March 1984, Kaiser sold about 39 percent of the Bowlen I partnership to John R. In 1984, Kaiser disposed of his entire interest in Bowlen I, including his interest held through Kaiser I (the corporate entity), in two separate transactions. Due to Bowlen's prior interest in purchasing the Broncos, in late 1983, Kaiser approached Bowlen about acquiring an interest in the partnership. 25 percent of Bowlen I was also indirectly owned by Kaiser, through a corporation E.F.K. Prior to Bowlen's involvement in the Broncos, Bowlen I was 99.75-percent owned by Edgar F. (Bowlen I), was a Colorado limited partnership with its principal place of business in Colorado at the time the petition was filed.
#P D B SPORTS LTD PROFESSIONAL#
During 1984-85, Bowlen acquired an interest as a general partner in a partnership that was the franchised owner and operator of the Denver Broncos (Broncos) professional football team, a member of the National Football League (NFL). Thereafter, he began a real estate development business which he operated into the late 1980's.
Patrick Bowlen (Bowlen), after graduating from the University of Oklahoma law school, practiced law for 2 years in Calgary, Canada. In particular, the controversy centers on whether section 1056 was intended to apply where the buyer acquires a partnership interest in a partnership holding player contracts.
#P D B SPORTS LTD PLUS#
Conversely, respondent contends that section 1056 applies to limit amortization to an amount equal to the seller's basis, plus any gain recognized by the seller. Petitioner contends that the partnership provisions apply exclusively and would, in this case, permit the amortization of the fair market value of the player contracts. After concessions, the sole issue remaining for our consideration is whether the partnership, for purposes of determining the amortizable basis in player contracts, is subject to section 1056 1 in addition to, in conjunction with, or instead of the subchapter K partnership provisions. Among other adjustments, respondent disallowed amortization in the amounts of $1,878,056 and $259, respectively, claimed with respect to professional football player contracts. Respondent issued notices of final partnership administrative adjustments to P.D.B. K basis adjustment sections and regulations thereunder. Held, further: Partnership correctly computed the basis in the player contracts under the subch. 1056, I.R.C., does not apply to this partnership transaction involving a sports franchise. 1056, I.R.C., does not apply to partnership transactions involving sports franchises, the partnership's basis would be less than claimed under subch. 1056, I.R.C., applies and would limit the amortizable basis in the player contracts, even though the contracts were acquired through purchase of an interest in a partnership. Partnership claimed amortization deductions using the 36X basis.
708, I.R.C., causes a termination and triggers the partnership basis provisions causing a stepped-up basis (to fair market value) in the player contracts to 36X. Because more than 50 percent of Partnership's ownership had changed, P contends that sec. Partnership's presale basis in player contracts was 6X. SPORTS, LTD., BOWLEN SPORTS, INC., TAX MATTERS PARTNER, PetitionerĬOMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RespondentĪn individual purchased more than a 50-percent interest in a partnership, that owned and operated a professional sports franchise.
#P D B SPORTS LTD TRIAL#
That trial is scheduled for July 12 in Arapahoe County Court.P.D.B. His two children from his first marriage, Amie Bowlen Klemmer and Beth Bowlen Wallace, want their father's trust invalidated on the grounds he lacked mental capacity when it was last executed in 2009. The preferred candidate is Brittany Bowlen, one of his five children with his second wife, Annabel Bowlen. It's up to the trustees to select a successor to Bowlen as controlling owner, whether it's one of his children or an outside buyer. This latest legal filing is separate from a civil lawsuit pitting Bowlen's two eldest daughters against the trustees who have run the team for the last eight years: Broncos CEO and President Joe Ellis, team counsel Rich Slivka and Denver attorney Mary Kelly. Kaiser lost his case in both state and federal courts. Kaiser sued Bowlen in 1999 claiming that Bowlen offering a slice of the team to John Elway triggered Kaiser's right of first refusal. At the time of his death, Bowlen owned 78% of the franchise with his brother John owning the remaining 22%. Shortly after buying Kaiser's majority share of the NFL team, Bowlen and his siblings bought out the remaining 39.2% of the team from two minority owners. A message was left with Jim Kilroy, a lawyer representing ROFR Holdings.