- 76 -
otherwise exist. Thus, we conclude that the ETD determination is
applicable to all the years involved herein.
Our conclusion that Article IV(f)(6) does not provide a
credit of Amoco Egypt's income taxes against EGPC's income taxes
disposes of respondent's argument that Article IV(f)(6)
constituted a de jure exemption from tax to Amoco Egypt which
would deprive it of the foreign tax credit claimed herein. Amoco
Egypt was subjected to Egyptian income tax by Article IV(f)(1),
and our findings of fact show: (1) Amoco Egypt filed Egyptian
income tax returns; (2) pursuant to Article IV(f)(3) of the MCA,
EGPC agreed to pay Amoco Egypt's Egyptian taxes; (3) EGPC paid
such taxes to the Egyptian Tax Department on a timely basis; (4)
those payments were posted to Amoco Egypt's tax file number; and
(5) Amoco Egypt has official receipts from the ETD evidencing the
payments made on behalf of Amoco Egypt. Furthermore, petitioner
has satisfied the substantiation requirements of section 905(b).
Respondent argues, based on her contrary interpretation of
Article IV(f)(6) that, as a result of EGPC's later failure to
dispute the 1992 ETD determination, its payments pursuant to that
determination were voluntary, and the compulsory tax provisions
of section 1.901-2(e)(5), Income Tax Regs., have not been
satisfied. Under the foregoing circumstances, this argument
falls by the wayside.
Our analysis, and the conclusions we have thus far reached,
are not, however, dispositive of the foreign tax credit issue
Page: Previous 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011