Utah Jojoba I Research, William G. Kellen, Tax Matters Partner - Page 26

                                        - 26 -                                         

          purported plan to breed the seeds from only one generation of                
          jojoba plants in an attempt to produce a jojoba plant with                   
          superior attributes was nothing more than U.S. Agri practicing               
          culling.  Chen's report explained that U.S. Agri's activities                
          were not plant breeding.  Producing plants with consistently                 
          superior attributes takes many generations in order to assure                
          that "the progenies would breed true."                                       
               After touring U.S. Agri's laboratory and greenhouse in                  
          Riverside, California, Chen concluded that the activities carried            
          out in the laboratory and greenhouse had not been contracted for             
          by Utah I.  The amended research plan of Utah I contains no                  
          references to U.S. Agri's laboratory or greenhouse.  U.S. Agri               
          did not provide Chen with any of its expense records regarding               
          the contract fee it received from Utah I.                                    
               On the basis of the foregoing, Chen concluded that in his               
          expert opinion "the partnership has not shown that it has done               
          anything but farming."                                                       
                                       OPINION                                         
               This partnership proceeding is governed by the procedural               
          rules of the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982                
          (TEFRA), Pub. L. 97-248, sec. 402(a), 96 Stat. 648, codified as              
          secs. 6221-6233.  Under section 6221, the tax treatment of                   
          partnership items is determined at the partnership level.  We                
          conclude that Utah I is not entitled to a section 174(a) research            





Page:  Previous  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011