- 18 -
contrary to common sense.13 Indeed, bearing in mind that
petitioners’ Federal income tax returns report no sale revenues
for their alleged sales of meals to their employees, petitioners’
reporting of these meals supports our conclusion. We also note
that petitioners’ memorandum of law states that petitioners
provide these meals to their employees at “no charge”.
We hold that petitioners’ provision of the meals is not
within section 274(e)(8). In so holding, we have considered all
arguments made by petitioners for a contrary holding and, to the
extent not discussed above, have found them to be without merit.
To reflect the foregoing,
An appropriate order
denying both motions for
partial summary judgment will
be issued.
13 As we understand petitioners’ argument, they sold the
meals to their employees at cost. Whereas a willing buyer would
be delighted to purchase a meal at cost, very few (if any)
willing sellers would be able to stay in business if they
continued to sell the meals at cost.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Last modified: May 25, 2011