Sam H. Patton - Page 5




                                        - 5 -                                         
               Section 179(a) generally allows a taxpayer to elect to treat           
          the cost of section 179 property as a current expense in the year           
          the property is placed in service, within certain dollar                    
          limitations.4  See sec. 179(b).  The election must specify the              
          items of section 179 property to which the election applies and             
          the portion of the cost of each item which is to be taken into              
          account under section 179(a).  See sec. 179(c)(1)(A); sec. 1.179-           
          5(a)(1) and (2), Income Tax Regs.  Moreover, a section 179                  
          election must be made on the taxpayer’s first income tax return             
          (whether or not the return is timely) or on an amended return               
          filed within the time prescribed by law (including extensions)              
          for filing the original return for such year.  See Genck v.                 
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-105; sec. 179(c)(1)(B); sec 1.179-            
          5(a), Income Tax Regs.  An election made under section 179 and              
          any specifications contained in such election may not be revoked            
          (modified or changed) without the Secretary’s consent.  See sec.            
          179(c)(2); King v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990-548.                       
               Petitioner argues that respondent’s refusal to consent to              
          petitioner’s request to revoke or modify his election so as to              
          include the recharacterized assets is contrary to the spirit of             


               4 The parties agree that the assets would have qualified as            
          sec. 179 property if petitioner had made an election with respect           
          to them on his original 1995 return.  The parties also agree that           
          petitioner had sufficient income from the welding business to               
          have deducted $17,500, the maximum amount allowable under sec.              
          179 for the 1995 tax year.                                                  





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011