Farmland Industries, Inc. - Page 88




                                       - 83 -                                         
             financial investments); Cotter & Co. v. United States, 765               
             F.2d 1102 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (income from rental of excess                 
             warehouse space); Land O'Lakes v. United States, 675 F.2d                
             988 (8th Cir. 1982) (dividends); Illinois Grain Corp. v.                 
             Commissioner, 87 T.C. 435 (1986) (dividends and income from              
             rental of barges); Dundee Citrus Growers Association v.                  
             Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1991-487 (interest income);                     
             Linnton Plywood Association v. United States, 410 F. Supp.               
             1100 (D. Or. 1976).                                                      
                  In fact, the premise of respondent's argument, that                 
             section 1.1382-3(c)(2), Income Tax Regs., requires income                
             from the lease of premises, from investment in securities,               
             and from the sale or exchange of capital assets to be                    
             treated as nonpatronage per se was rejected by this Court                
             in Illinois Grain Corp. v. Commissioner, supra 451.  In                  
             that case, the Court noted that “the apparently clear                    
             language of the regulation”, stating that income from the                
             lease of premises, from investment in securities, or from                
             the sale or exchange of capital assets are examples of                   
             nonpatronage income is language that, under the law, as it               
             has developed, “does not always mean what it literally                   
             says.”  Id.  The Court continued as follows:                             

                       Thus, in the case of interest, both the                        
                  courts and respondent have acknowledged that                        
                  interest income may have the quality of income                      





Page:  Previous  73  74  75  76  77  78  79  80  81  82  83  84  85  86  87  88  89  90  91  92  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011