Norwest Corporation and Subsidiaries, Successor in Interest to United Banks of Colorado, Inc., and Subsidiaries, et al. - Page 43

                                       - 43 -                                         
               two; or whether, on the other hand, he so encumbered                   
               his property with rights running to the property owners                
               (regardless of who retained nominal title) that he in                  
               substance disposed of these facilities, intending to                   
               recover his capital, and derive a return of his                        
               investment through the sale of the lots.10  * * *                      
                    10Actually, in most of the cases, the asset                       
               involved is encumbered with rights running to the                      
               property owners which significantly diminish the value                 
               of an asset which nevertheless retains substantial                     
               value.  This diminution, resulting from restrictions                   
               benefiting the adjacent lots, represents a pro tanto                   
               disposal with each lot.  However, there is no basis in                 
               the decided cases, and certainly none in the record                    
               before us, for making an allocation based on the rights                
               disposed of and the property retained.                                 
          See also Derby Heights, Inc. v. Commissioner, 48 T.C. 900 (1967);           
          Dahling v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1988-430; Bryce's Mountain              
          Resort, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1985-293; Montclair Dev.           
          Co. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1966-200.                                   
                    b.  The Principles of the Developer Line of Cases                 
               The developer line of cases all involve real estate                    
          developers that seek to allocate the cost of certain common                 
          improvements to the bases of residential lots held for sale.                
          Respondent suggests that the principles of the developer line of            
          cases are applicable only in that context because, “[i]n that               
          context, both the purpose for incurring the costs and the                   
          properties benefitted thereby are readily identifiable.”  An                
          examination of the principles underlying the developer line of              
          cases, however, does not suggest that those principles are                  
          restricted to any particular factual context or that difficulty             
          in application justifies nonadherence.  We need not decide                  




Page:  Previous  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011