- 33 -                                         
          be applicable with respect to any property as of January 1,                 
          1981”.  Sec. 168(g)(2) (emphasis added).  We agree with                     
          petitioner; the language is not ambiguous, and accordingly we               
          need not peer into the legislative history.  Nevertheless, such             
          an inquiry would support our analysis.  The intent of the ACRS              
          was to eliminate disagreement between taxpayers and the                     
          Commissioner and to stimulate economic activity.  One essential             
          theme of the ACRS was predictable depreciation periods; that was            
          accomplished by freezing in time the property classifications as            
          they were on January 1, 1981.  Until further amendment by                   
          Congress, there were to be no changes.                                      
               C.   Conclusion                                                        
               Drop and block, as of January 1, 1981, was included in FCC             
          account No. 232.  That account had an asset guideline period of             
          10 years, making it 5-year property under section 168(c)(2)(B).             
          We conclude that drop and block placed in service in the years in           
          question is 5-year property for purposes of the ACRS.                       
                                                  Decision will be entered            
                                              under Rule 155.                         
               Reviewed by the Court.                                                 
               SWIFT, PARR, WELLS, RUWE, WHALEN, BEGHE, FOLEY, VASQUEZ, and           
          GALE, JJ., agree with this majority opinion.                                
               CHIECHI, J., did not participate in the consideration of               
          this opinion.                                                               
               COLVIN, J., dissents.                                                  
Page:  Previous   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   NextLast modified: May 25, 2011