- 21 -
In examining the plain language of the statute, the Court in
Security Bank Minn. v. Commissioner, supra, stated:
In the Code and in normal bank parlance, terms
such as acquisition and issue commonly refer to third-
party debt instruments; "loans" are "made" by a bank to
its customers. * * * The terms "loan" and "made" are
noticeably absent from the definition of short-term
obligations in section 1283(a)(1)(A). [Security Bank
Minn. v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. at 39.]
Similarly, in evaluating the legislative record, the Court in
Security Bank Minn. noted that: "all of the available material
[in the legislative history] is expressed in terms relating to
purchased or acquired instruments, not expressly to loans made."
Id. at 41.
Against this background, respondent asserts that time
deposits and CD's are "purchased" or "acquired" from other banks,
within the common meaning of those words, and within the meaning
developed by the Court in Security Bank Minn. v. Commissioner,
supra. Respondent additionally asserts that the obligor banks on
such deposits and CD's are not "customers" of the bank that owns
the deposits and CD's, once again within both the common meaning
of the term and the meaning developed in Security Bank Minn. v.
Commissioner, supra.
We believe that whether, as a matter of law, respondent's
argument is correct depends, at least in part, on the answers to
a number of factual questions concerning the nature of time
deposits and CD's. For example, before we could rule on
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011