- 96 - and the reported and taxed income was an adequate rate of return by comparison to various industry standards. Respondent argues and, for reasons appearing below, we agree that we need not belabor or even discuss this evidence. Respondent determined that the amounts that petitioners deducted under section 162(a) as franchise and royalty payments to Manver were not “ordinary and necessary” business expenses under section 162(a). Respondent’s main contention is that the transactions that were the basis for the deductions were not bona fide arm’s-length transactions at fair market value and that the transactions had no economic purpose or substance. Respondent further determined that the amounts deducted represented income to nonresident alien individuals/foreign corporations and that distribution, apportionment, or allocation is necessary in order to prevent evasion of taxes and to reflect income clearly as authorized under section 482. On brief, respondent agrees with petitioners that conceptually section 482 would apply because of petitioners’ common control, the shifting of income and deductions, and the need to reflect income clearly. Respondent contends, however, that there is no need to resort to allocations under section 482 because the Medieval Times companies owned the intangibles that they were purporting to license and there was no economic substance to the transactions.Page: Previous 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011