United Parcel Service of America - Page 3




                                        - 3 -                                         

               (1)  Whether amounts collected by petitioner as "excess                
          value charges" (EVC's)3 from its customers must be included in              
          gross income in 1984 pursuant to section 61.  We hold that EVC's            
          must be included in petitioner's income.4                                   
               (2)  Whether petitioner is entitled to deductions under                
          section 162 for any amounts paid to National Union Fire Insurance           
          Co. of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (NUF).  We hold that petitioner             
          is not entitled to those deductions.                                        
               (3)  Whether respondent properly disallowed petitioner's               
          deduction of $11,151,675 paid to Liberty Mutual Insurance Group             
          (Liberty Mutual) as California workers' compensation premiums.              
          We hold that the deduction is allowable.                                    
               (4)  Whether petitioner is liable for an addition to tax               
          pursuant to section 6653(a)(1) and (2) for negligence or                    



               2(...continued)                                                        
          with respect to the Liberty Mutual policy to $11,151,675.                   
               In the notice of deficiency, respondent disallowed sec. 38             
          investment tax credits of $1.6 million and $19,006,175 reported             
          by petitioner in 1983 and 1984, respectively.  On Sept. 15, 1997,           
          the parties filed a Joint Motion to Sever, requesting that the              
          Court sever the investment tax credit issue.  On Sept. 15, 1997,            
          the motion to sever the sec. 38 investment tax credit was                   
          granted.  The parties subsequently engaged in mediation and                 
          settled this issue.                                                         
               3Throughout the opinion, "EVC" represents "excess value                
          charge" and "EVC's" represents "excess value charges".                      
               4As a result of our holding, we need not consider                      
          respondent's alternative arguments under secs. 482 and 845(a).              




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011