Larry W. and Cynthia J/ Van Wyk - Page 9




                                        - 9 -                                         

          that the proposed regulations do not apply when they present                
          contrary authority.  Nonetheless, proposed regulations are given            
          no greater weight than a position advanced by the Commissioner on           
          brief.  See, e.g., F.W. Woolworth Co. v. Commissioner, 54 T.C.              
          1233, 1265-1266 (1970).  Yet proposed regulations can be useful             
          as guidelines where they closely follow the legislative history             
          of the act.  See Estate of Wallace v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. 525,            
          547 (1990), affd. 965 F.2d 1038 (11th Cir. 1992).  We have                  
          previously cited the section 465 proposed regulations for that              
          purpose.  See Melvin v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 63 (1987), affd.              
          894 F.2d 1072 (9th Cir. 1990).                                              
               To read section 465(b)(1)(A) as petitioners suggest would be           
          inconsistent with section 465(b)(1)(B).  Accordingly, we conclude           
          that Congress did not intend such a result and that such a                  
          construction of the statute would be inappropriate.  See, e.g.,             
          Weinberger v. Hynson, Westcott & Dunning, Inc., 412 U.S. 609,               
          633-634 (1973) (interpreting a statute in such a manner "offends            
          the well-settled rule of statutory construction that all parts of           
          a statute, if at all possible, are to be given effect"); In re              
          Windsor on the River Associates, 7 F.3d 127, 130 (8th Cir. 1993);           
          Bokum v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 126, 154 (1990), affd. 992 F.2d              
          1132 (11th Cir. 1993).                                                      
               Respondent also points to statements by the Staff of the               
          Joint Committee on Taxation as an explanation of how Congress               





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

Last modified: May 25, 2011