upr000105 242

(BCC - Mr, E, E, Bennett Omaha - October 20, 1952 ZlM Mr* A. E. Stoddard: Re: Transfer of property to and from las Yegas Land and Water Company. Mr, Hulsizer, In his 0*476 of Ontoher 9th to yon, copy to me, suggested that the LYL&WCo, *s holdings (other than the water system) be transferred to The Onion Land Company, This corresponds with the suggestion X made in my letter to you of December IS, 1951, On October 13th X wrote Mr, Bennett, requesting him to outline specifically and in detail the steps necessary to be taken in qualifying The Onion Land Company in California and Heyada. dying further consideration to the subject Of transfer of property causes me to wonder why in the interest of simplicity and expediency it would not be well to transfer the LTL&W property (other than the water system) to the Los Angeles & Salt Lake Railroad Company. This X think would hare two favorable results: (a) The necessity of qualifying The Union Land Company in the two states would be avoided; and (b) The property would automatically go under the blanket lease to Union Pacific Railroad Company. There are no outstanding mortgages on the LA&SL and therefore on substantial reason for carrying property in the name of an unmortgaged subsidiary no longer exists. A quick consultation In the Los Angeles office resulted in the opinion that there would probably be very little difference in the amount of California taxes whether the LYL&W property were transferred to The Union Land Company or to the LA&SL. However, if you think favorably of the suggestion that the property be transferred to the LA&SL you may desire to have Mr, Hulsizer look further Into the question of taxes. W. R. ROUSE