Medieval Attractions N.V - Page 151

                                       - 98 -                                         
                         which has substantial value independent of                   
                         the services of any individual.                              
               Section 1.482-1(i)(5), Income Tax Regs., defines a                     
          controlled taxpayer as follows:                                             
                    (5) Controlled taxpayer means any one of two or                   
               more taxpayers owned or controlled directly or                         
               indirectly by the same interests, and includes the                     
               taxpayer that owns or controls the other taxpayers.                    
               * * *                                                                  
               In determining the true taxable income of a controlled                 
          taxpayer, the standard to be applied in every case is that of a             
          taxpayer dealing at arm’s length with an uncontrolled taxpayer.             
          Sec. 1.482-1(b), Income Tax Regs.  The “arm’s-length” test                  
          commonly associated with section 482 is equally applicable in               
          ascertaining the “ordinary and necessary” character of a payment            
          to a related party that is deducted under section 162(a).  R.T.             
          French Co. v. Commissioner, 60 T.C. 836, 849 (1973).  A                     
          controlled transaction meets the arm’s-length standard if the               
          results of the transaction are consistent with the results that             
          would have been realized if uncontrolled taxpayers had engaged in           
          the same transaction under the same circumstances (arm’s-length             
          result).  Sec. 1.482-1(b), Income Tax Regs.                                 
               Petitioners argue that the "White Paper", "A Study of                  
          Intercompany Pricing Under Section 482 of the Code," I.R.S.                 
          Notice 88-123, 1988-2 C.B. 458, referred to legislative rejection           
          of R.T. French Co.  The White Paper addressed only the view that            
          a long-term fixed rate royalty agreement could not be adjusted              
          under section 482 based on actual events.  Notice 88-123, 1988-2            



Page:  Previous  88  89  90  91  92  93  94  95  96  97  98  99  100  101  102  103  104  105  106  107  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011