- 84 - related party who sold the property to the CFC, are substantial in nature. Based on our examination of the entire record before us, we find that the sunglass assembly operations conducted by B&L Ireland and by B&L Hong Kong with respect to the parts they purchased from related parties were substantial in nature within the meaning of section 1.954-3(a)(4)(iii), Income Tax Regs. Were the Assembly Operations at Issue Generally Considered to Constitute the Manufacture of Sunglasses? Petitioners contend that the respective sunglass assembly operations conducted by B&L Ireland and B&L Hong Kong were gen- erally considered to constitute the manufacture of sunglasses. Respondent disagrees. The determination of whether the assembly operations of a company are generally considered to constitute the manufacture of a product is based on the facts and circumstances surrounding those operations. Sec. 1.954-3(a)(4)(iii), Income Tax Regs. The most important factor in making that determination is whether the industry in which the company is involved generally considers those operations to constitute the manufacture or production of property. See Garnac Grain Co. v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. at 29; Webb Export Corp. v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. at 148. Petitioners argue that we should look to the sunglass in- dustry to determine whether it generally considers the respectivePage: Previous 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011