PNC Bancorp, Inc. Successor to First National Pennsylvania Corporation, et al. - Page 39

                                         39                                           
          We also pointed out in Electric & Neon, Inc. v. Commissioner,               
          supra at 1333:                                                              

               while consistency is highly desirable when combined                    
               with some acceptable method of accounting, it is not a                 
               substitute for correctness; the respondent is justified                
               in requiring a change in a taxpayer's method of                        
               accounting which, although consistently used over a                    
               period of years, is erroneous, and does not clearly                    
               reflect income.                                                        

               Accordingly, we find that the banks' current deduction of              
          the costs associated with the origination of the loans did not              
          clearly reflect their income and, therefore, was not a proper               
          method of accounting.26  See also Commissioner v. Idaho Power               
          Co., 418 U.S. at 14 ("capitalization prevents the distortion of             
          income that would otherwise occur if depreciation properly                  
          allocable to asset acquisition were deducted from gross income              
          currently realized.").  It is apparent that the banks' current              
          deduction of the costs at issue improperly accelerated the tax              
          benefits derived from those costs and did not properly match the            
          costs with the interest income produced by the loans.  We find              
          that capitalization of these expenses, subject to recovery by               
          means of amortization over the life of the loans, does clearly              
          reflect the banks' income and that respondent was within his                
          broad authority to require this change.                                     

          Legislative Necessity                                                       


               26We note that petitioner did not offer any evidence to show           
          how the current deduction of the costs at issue clearly reflects            
          the banks' income.                                                          


Page:  Previous  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011