- 89 -
location, it was discarded because of potential health hazards
resulting from its placement in hospital buildings.
Respondent's reliance on Minot Fed. Sav. & Loan Association
v. United States, supra, is misplaced. Carpeting was not in
issue in Minot. In the passage quoted above and cited by
respondent, the District Court admonished the Government for
taking an inconsistent and contrary position (that removable
partitions were structural components) from the principles and
rationale of Rev. Rul. 67-349 (that "wall-to-wall" carpeting was
tangible personal property). The District Court did not find
that carpeting per se constitutes a structural component. The
Minot case, furthermore, predates the Senate Finance Committee
report for the 1978 Revenue Act wherein carpeting specifically is
identified as tangible personal property. S. Rept. 95-1263,
1978-3 C.B. (Vol. 1) at 415.
Based on the foregoing, we hold that the carpeting in the
subject category constitutes tangible personal property and that
it is depreciable over a 5-year recovery period.
7. Vinyl Wall Coverings
The vinyl wall coverings (Property Unit 2380) in the subject
category are the original vinyl wall coverings placed in
petitioners' facilities during construction. See supra p. 19.
Petitioners contend that the vinyl wall coverings are not
structural components of petitioners' buildings, but are section
Page: Previous 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011