- 13 -
311 (1968). Thus the functional test is described as one that
inquires (1) Whether the purpose of the structure at issue is a
purpose "ejusdem generis" to the purposes described by example in
section 1.48-1(e)(1), Income Tax Regs., and (2) whether the
structure performs a function similar to those structures
enumerated in section 1.48-1(e)(1), Income Tax Regs., as
buildings; i.e., apartment houses, factory and office buildings,
warehouses, barns, garages, railway or bus stations, and stores.
See Consolidated Freightways, Inc. v. Commissioner, 74 T.C. 768,
795 (1980), affd. in part and revd. in part on another issue 708
F.2d 1385 (9th Cir. 1983).
Thus, the Court must consider whether the structure
functions like a building; i.e., does it "'provide shelter * * *
or furnish working * * * space, or exist for another purpose that
could be listed with the enumerated purposes without violating
the constraining rules of ejusdem generis.'" See Consolidated
Freightways, Inc. v. Commissioner, 708 F.2d 1385, 1388 (9th Cir.
1983), affg. in part and revg. in part on another issue 74 T.C.
768 (1980).
In applying the functional test, one of the major focuses of
inquiry is whether the structure provides working space for
employees that is more than merely incidental to the primary
function of the structure. See, e.g., Brown-Forman Distillers
Corp. v. United States, 205 Ct. C1. 402, 418, 499 F.2d 1263, 1271
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011