- 30 -
Mallinckrodt, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1984-532, affd.
778 F.2d 402 (8th Cir. 1985). Therefore, the mere fact that the
Reserve Facility is theoretically capable of being moved does not
conclusively establish that it is not inherently permanent.
In the instant case, petitioner has failed to establish that
either the design or the construction of the Reserve Facility
indicates a lack of permanence. The Reserve Facility was
specifically designed for the site as an addition to petitioner's
distribution center. Construction of the Reserve Facility
required extensive site work. The foundation for the Reserve
Facility, which petitioner concedes cannot be moved, also
involved considerable effort and expense. Moreover the materials
used and the method of construction further indicate the
permanent nature of the Reserve Facility. Finally, petitioner
concedes that it has no plans to move the Reserve Facility and
that the time and effort involved, if it were to move the
structure, would be substantial. In light of the evidence
presented, we find that the Reserve Facility is inherently
permanent and thus an improvement to petitioner's land.
Relying on section 1.48-1(c), Income Tax Regs., petitioner
nevertheless contends that the Reserve Facility is in the nature
of machinery and qualifies as tangible personal property,
notwithstanding the fact that it is an inherently permanent
structure. See Munford, Inc. v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 463
(1986); Weirick v. Commissioner, 62 T.C. 446, 451-452 (1974);
Page: Previous 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011