- 39 -
involve heavy machinery. We stated in Texas Instruments that, to
the extent that the component also served as a floor, "this use
'[was] strictly incidental to the use that necessitated its
special design.'" Id. (quoting Rev. Rul. 79-183, supra, 1979-1
C.B. at 45). In addition, we held that another floor in Texas
Instruments was not tangible personal property, because "it was
not so specially designed, constructed, or used to serve other
qualifying property". Id.
We note that the Reserve Facility's concrete slab floor is
thicker than a conventional warehouse floor. The thickness of
the Reserve Facility's concrete slab floor is due primarily to
petitioner's choice of structural support; i.e., the racks, which
are not qualifying property.11 However, we do not find that the
thickness of the concrete slab was essential to the operation of
petitioner's transtackers, which are qualifying property.
Consequently, the function of the concrete slab floor as a
structural component was not strictly incidental to its special
design; rather, its function as a structural component of the
Reserve Facility necessitated its special design.
Petitioner also argues that the concrete slab's special
design is necessary for the efficient operation of the
11A conventional warehouse floor would require footings
under the structural support columns. These footings would be
thicker than the rest of the conventional floor slab. The size
of the footings would depend upon the column loads and soil
characteristics of the site.
Page: Previous 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011