- 20 -
sold should not be treated as a sale for purposes of the accrual
of income. See H. Rept. 94-1354, supra at 3. It does not
follow, however, that Congress believed these shipments should be
deductible as promotional expenses. Reading the many statements
characterizing the distribution of excess copies as a promotional
device in context, we think it likely that they were intended
only to provide a reason why treatment of the transaction as a
sale for tax purposes was inappropriate, and not a reason why the
costs should be deductible. Were we to accept petitioners'
interpretation arguendo, the very fact that such statements are
so numerous in the legislative history would make it all the more
puzzling that there is no explicit statement of petitioners'
conclusion that costs attributable to the excess copies should be
deducted in full in the year of shipment.
Petitioners' argument fails to explain why Congress did not
expressly provide for the deduction which, in their view,
Congress intended. We gather from petitioners' brief that they
believe Congress felt it unnecessary to act to secure the cost of
goods sold deduction for excess copies because this deduction
would be available under the general principles of inventory
accounting set forth in section 1.471-1, Income Tax Regs. We
think it unlikely that Congress would have understood section
1.471-1, Income Tax Regs., and the other applicable provisions of
the Code and regulations to apply in this way.
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011