General Dynamics Corporation and Subsidiaries - Page 47

                                       - 47 -                                         

          make in 1984, after delivery of 120 aircraft, an accurate                   
          determination of the 1982 program year profit, inasmuch as there            
          then remained to be delivered the vast majority of aircraft                 
          called for under Contract 2034.                                             
               3.  Independent Pricing Factor                                         
               In evaluating Contract 2034, respondent suggests that four             
          relevant facts and circumstances, as set forth in section 1.451-            
          3(e)(1)(ii), Income Tax Regs., are to be considered.  Those                 
          factors concern whether:  (1) There was separate delivery and/or            
          acceptance of aircraft; (2) the aircraft were independently                 
          priced; (3) there was a business purpose for several or a single            
          contract; and (4) there were various other customary commercial             
          practices involving the production of aircraft.  Respondent, by             
          grouping the factors together, attempts to place independent                
          pricing on par with other factors.13  However, as decided in                
          Sierracin Corp. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 341 (1988), the                    
          independent pricing aspect is particularly significant.                     


               13  Respondent in an Action on Decision acquiescing in                 
          Sierracin Corp. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 341 (1988), made the               
          following comment about our emphasis on independent pricing in              
          that case:                                                                  
                    The court's undue emphasis on independent pricing                 
               restricts the application of the regulations in other                  
               cases and is not controlling.  For example, in a                       
               situation in which there are significant time intervals                
               between the delivery dates of items under a multi-unit                 
               contract, the Service is not precluded from asserting                  
               that the contract should be severed notwithstanding the                
               absence of independent pricing.  [Action on Decision                   
               1990-016 (May 18, 1990), 1990-1 C.B. 1.]                               



Page:  Previous  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011