- 23 -
intended taxpayers to be able to redetermine FSC commission
expenses after their original tax returns have been filed is not
explicitly stated in the statute or its legislative history. In
light of the silence of section 925(a) on this score, the
challenged Regulation in no way can be said to contradict or
limit the "unambiguous" language of the statute. Cf. id. at
1064. On the contrary, the Regulation fosters the goal of
section 925(a) of allowing taxpayers to maximize FSC expenses
within certain parameters.
In addition to being entirely consistent with the statute
and legislative history, the dual section 6511 requirement is in
no way unreasonable. See Faltesek v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 1204,
1210-1211 (1989). Since the returns of both the FSC and the
related supplier are necessarily affected by any redeterminations
under the Regulation, it is logical to require any recomputations
to be made within a timeframe applicable to both taxpayers. To
deny the Secretary the ability to place time constraints on the
benefits conferred by the Regulation would unduly circumscribe
his authority under section 7805(a) to adopt "all needful rules
and regulations" for the enforcement of the revenue statutes.
(Emphasis added.) Moreover, the lack of such a time limit would
raise the specter of ex post facto or retroactive tax planning--a
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011