Albert J. Miller - Page 14

                                       - 14 -                                         
          the contract would be performed in the United States.  Respondent           
          argues that under the regulations, income is fixed when it is to            
          be paid in amounts definitely predetermined, and determinable               
          whenever there is a basis of calculation by which the amount may            
          be ascertained.  Secs. 1.1441-2(a)(1) and (2), Income Tax Regs;             
          see also sec. 1.881-2(b), Income Tax Regs.  The decision here to            
          allocate the contract for research and development was                      
          consistently made by A-Alpha during a tax year of the limited               
          partnerships that was later than the year of payment by the                 
          limited partnerships.                                                       
               Respondent argues that in instances like the present case              
          where it is not yet determinable what portion of a payment is               
          subject to withholding, the regulations provide that the                    
          withholding agent should withhold on the entire amount, and the             
          payee can then apply for a refund.13  Specifically, section                 
          1.1441-3(d), Income Tax Regs., provides that where the                      
          withholding agent does not know the amount of recognized gain, he           
          is required to deduct and withhold an amount sufficient to ensure           
          that not less than 30 percent of the recognized gain is taxed.              
          This treatment is limited to amounts described in section 1.1441-           
          2(b)(2), Income Tax Regs, which enumerates certain income items             
          subject to the 30-percent withholding.  None of the categories of           


               13  This argument is at odds with respondent's argument that           
          withholding was only required in the portion of the contract                
          performed in the United States.                                             




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011