as your client board denies these funds one owned thirty percent of the company and the other and seventy percent of the company that makes one hundred percent which is more and then eighteen percent and let's and two guys who end up controlling four or five corporate entities get together and say we want to be in the business of buying failing we're going to control everything including the running of the company that may finish at two and we're going to determine control of the florida back company we're going to determine who they and we're going to change their operations because if we don't they're surely going to fail but if we do that maybe they will survive and grow make a very nice profit if they survive so we decided at the beginning that they are going to structure it this way and then they go on and actually do all of these things and in the end it is the control of these two owners of the brass company that enables them to do a good and mad country grass two layers  judgment against the correct there's no judgment against these limited partners these limited partnerships as a result of what the district court did they they're responsible for paying this unfunded starr and it's logically and if the limited partnerships are not liable who is going to provide the money and it's going to be the federal government have many funds left so did then and i don't understand the teamsters union to have the other funds set that they are going to put in here so  this is imply a partnership a trade or business on again that's really important to the outcome of this case kind of like you or your understanding of  watch handled that question and he he makes a point of saying that it will settle the whether a partnership is a creator business must be a result of a partnership will not by looking at the partner's own and then to try to identify what's going on at the partnership level he seems to be saying that these they did the same footing with perhaps four or five or six other will seize that is they were looking for investment opportunities they created suicides so you say that so he is just doing what he said he should do he just looking at the economic benefits to the partners and then applying that to the implied of investment and other companies but i understood the trade or business who are willing to be reckless brass fixture a company that is in gauged in a trade or this pattern of investment and for it the ruling on trade or business with two different issues in front of us but to have to do with the a now federal partnership to have the intended parties is rather important on the other hand we have the congress saying we want they were acting independently you are basing that on the fact that the general partners were the same but the reality is that the limited partners were totally different with perhaps different investment  interests designed differently however the management of the limited partnership is in the hands of the limited partnership committee any direct economic benefit on top of the benefit to see you cry be some friends all so this if direct economic benefit matters what is the direct economic benefit partnerships attempts to do but aren't you introducing enormous uncertainty into this particular area of finance by everybody these partnerships limited partnerships who did no serious investor i would think would make that kind of arrangement which was made here to try to resurrect that particular company or any company like it with an unfunded potential unfunded joy investment that exceeded the deference out of that so the court system turns to the federal government for help in sorting through these issues and assigned to congress than the chords and we have nothing from the right your other our agency in these matters because things such a partnership in  think that whatever we decide this case will have a very very important effect on how people view investing in companies which you would like to see sure by because of the problem w snail piercing and congress ran and directed us to iraq at an economic reality did not refer to the separate category of failed piercing so at least it fund separately we thought about where it made sense for each fund they were acting in their capacities for each from this isn't a case where they ordered in the last appeal or taking money out of one pocket and putting into the other they have responsibilities regulations that actually are in place this gets back to again when congress wanted there to be aggregation to add up to eight percent colorists sense though because of the very regulation  cases like it i mean those are those are cases where i think you have you know head of the incorporated entities that we have here what you have are individuals you have married couples and you're can you try to sort of how businesses that they run and how the economic benefits of those businesses should be to them as individuals so it seems to me that to refer to a case like that to those cases the partners need the choice to operate as a partnership into for the benefits of creating with it i built it into t here are the two funds made the choice to create the limited liability entity and