Union Carbide Corporation and Subsidiaries - Page 25

                                        - 25 -                                         
               In any event, taxpayers ordinarily would not have to ask for            
          consents during the course of a lengthy audit; respondent would              
          likely request Forms 872 from a related supplier and an FSC in               
          order to preserve his ability to assess any FSC-related                      
          deficiencies against one or the other.  Here, respondent                     
          presumably did not request Forms 872 from UCFSC because the audit            
          of the taxpayers' previous 3-year cycle had not yielded any FSC-             
          related adjustments.  It is of course also true, as respondent               
          recognizes, that regardless of the IRS's willingness or                      
          unwillingness to grant consents, a taxpayer in petitioner's shoes            
          need only anticipate the possibility of favorable revisions to               
          its FSC expenses and file a protective claim for refund within               
          the proper time in order to preserve rights under the Regulation.            
               Petitioner next argues that the Regulation unreasonably                 
          "creates a double standard, permitting respondent to 'whipsaw'               
          taxpayers with respect to the Commissioner's FSC recomputations";            
          i.e., by assessing FSC-related deficiencies against one taxpayer             
          after the period for the other taxpayer to claim refunds has                 
          expired.  Although not identical, we think that the situation                
          posed by petitioner is analogous to that in Collins Elec. Co. v.             
          Commissioner, 67 T.C. 911 (1977).  In that case we stated that               
                    Section 482 may contemplate a suspension of the                    
               running of the statute of limitation on claims for refund               
               of the overpayment attributable to the correlative                      
               adjustment or, as the first sentence of section 1.482-                  
               1(d)(2), Income Tax Regs., * * * seems to suggest, may                  
               impose a positive duty on the Commissioner, without regard              





Page:  Previous  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011