Norwest Corporation and Subsidiaries, Successor in Interest to United Banks of Colorado, Inc., and Subsidiaries, et al. - Page 68

                                        - 68 -                                        
          in no separate regular tax deduction for such members with                  
          separately computed items of tax preference; (2) the separately             
          computed items of tax preference are not aggregated on a                    
          consolidated basis; and (3) the aggregate amount allocated under            
          the 1502-33(d) allocation to members with positive taxable income           
          may exceed the consolidated regular tax liability of the group.20           
               D.  Analysis                                                           
                    1.  Issue                                                         
               The issue is whether petitioner is entitled to refunds of              
          payments made to satisfy the UBC affiliated group's corporate               
          minimum tax liabilities for the years in issue.                             


          20   That description of the consequence of petitioner’s method             
          is based on a stipulation of the parties.  We find it somewhat              
          confusing.  We believe that the primary reason that the aggregate           
          of the amounts allocated under the 1502-33(d) allocation may                
          exceed the consolidated regular tax liability of the group is               
          sec. 1.1502-33(d)(2)(ii)(b), Income Tax Regs., which allows for             
          an allocation of additional amounts no greater than the excess of           
          the separate return tax liability over the amount allocated in              
          accordance with the ratio of separate return tax liability to the           
          aggregate thereof for the group.  For example, assume the                   
          following: (1) The consolidated group comprises A, B, and C;                
          (2) A has taxable income of $100, B has taxable income of $100,             
          and C has a loss of $40; and (3) the regular tax rate is                    
          35 percent.  The consolidated regular tax liability would equal             
          $56 (35 percent of $160 (consolidated regular taxable income)).             
          Under petitioner's method, both A and B would be allocated                  
          50 percent of that amount because the ratio under sec. 1.1502-              
          33(d)(2)(ii)(a), Income Tax Regs., for both is $35:$70, see sec.            
          1.1552-1(a)(2), Income Tax Regs., (we assume that the separate              
          return tax liability of the loss corporation is zero; if                    
          negative, then A & B's ratios would only increase, resulting in             
          greater initial allocations to A & B anyway); thus both A and B             
          are allocated $28.  But sec. 1.1502-33(d)(2)(ii)(b), Income Tax             
          Regs., allows an allocation of an additional amount that is no              
          greater than $7 ($35 - $28), which could result in a total                  
          allocation to A & B of $70.  Seventy dollars is greater than the            
          consolidated regular tax liability of $56.                                  




Page:  Previous  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  74  75  76  77  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011