(B&W) PROTECTED BY MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION PROTECTIVE ORDER
GE 218 L (9-75) BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORPORATION
INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO MR. B. D. CUMMINS
DEPT. SENIOR V-P FINANCE
C. C. to Mr. C. J. Heger
FROM MR. B. E. BACON/sr ROUP RE DATE February 19, 1981
SUBJECT COST SHARING OF CENTRAL G SEARCH
In response to your request, I have compared IMASCO's "Cost
Sharing Contract" with BWT I comparable contract.
z It is my conclusion that no substance difference exists between
the two contracts. It is my feeling, based on the minor differences
set out on the attached, that the wo ing of IMASCO's contract
better sets out the spirit of the Cost Sharing arrangement. How-
ever, it is my further understanding that BWT's contract has passed
the test of IRS audit.
As you recall (copy of correspondence attached), we proposed
two alternatives to the wording on the amount to be contributed
--,(clause 2(b)). For whatever reason neither was accepted, and
ye @,the ng in IMASCO's contract embodies the intent of
our "Turnover Ratio" alternative.
This response is based solely on the information in my files
without conferring with the BWT or BATUS Law Departments. Please
advise if you desire me to persue the matter further.
z
B. E. B.
z
Attachments
z
6320856995
M 13