Frank's Casing Crew and Rental Tools, Inc. - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         
          petitioner had completed its performance with respect to the                
          sales and services.  The parties do not dispute the amount of               
          income earned by petitioner for these goods and services.  We               
          conclude that respondent committed no abuse of discretion in                
          determining that the all events test had been met.  Petitioner              
          must accrue income from the goods and services in the taxable               
          year in which performance occurs, and it cannot wait until the              
          year in which it invoices its customer.  Although petitioner may            
          not have physically possessed all of the documentation necessary            
          to invoice its customers for the sales and services in the year             
          of performance, petitioner's preparation and sending of the                 
          invoices were ministerial acts that did not postpone accrual of             
          the income otherwise earned.  See Continental Tie & Lumber Co. v.           
          United States, 286 U.S. 290 (1932); Dally v. Commissioner, 227              
          F.2d 724 (9th Cir. 1955), affg. 20 T.C. 894 (1953); Frost Lumber            
          Indus. v. Commissioner, 128 F.2d 693 (5th Cir. 1942), revg. 44              
          B.T.A. 1249 (1941); Orange & Rockland Utils., Inc. v.                       
          Commissioner, 86 T.C. 199, 214 (1986).  For purposes of the                 
          all-events test, completion of petitioner's performance on the              
          contracts fixed its right to receive payment for the goods and              
          services, regardless of petitioner's invoicing practice.2                   

               2 While we have previously upheld deferred billing practices           
          of certain taxpayers, those taxpayers generally operated in a               
          heavily regulated industry or were able to establish wide                   
          acceptance within their industry of such an accounting practice.            
          See, e.g., Orange & Rockland Utils., Inc. v. Commissioner,                  
          86 T.C. 199 (1986); Public Serv. Co. of New Hampshire v.                    

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011