- 2 -
are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. Neither
party has requested a hearing on petitioners' motion.
Accordingly, we rule on petitioners' motion based on the parties'
submissions and the record in the instant case as a whole. We
incorporate by reference herein the portions of our opinion on
the merits in the instant case, Sicard v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1996-173, that are relevant to our disposition of the
motion.
On April 10, 1996, we issued our opinion in Sicard, in which
we held that a payment received by petitioner Leon Sicard
(petitioner) during 1987 from the White-Sicard Co. partnership
(partnership), of which he was a partner, was a guaranteed
payment within the meaning of section 707(c) and was therefore
includable in his income during the years that it was accrued by
the partnership.1 The years during which the guaranteed payment
was accrued by the partnership were closed at the time the notice
of deficiency in the instant case was issued to petitioners, and
we did not sustain respondent's determination that the payment
was includable in income for the year during which it was
received. The payment was not included in petitioner's income
1 The partnership used the accrual method of accounting, while
petitioner used the cash method. A guaranteed payment is
includable in a partner's income for the partner's taxable year
during which the payment is taken into account pursuant to the
partnership's method of accounting. Pratt v. Commissioner, 64
T.C. 203, 212-214 (1975), affd. in part and revd. in part on
another issue 550 F.2d 1023 (5th Cir. 1977).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011