- 11 -
respondent became aware of any additional facts that rendered his
position any more or less justified between the issuances of the
notices of deficiency and the filing of the answer to the
petitions.
Respondent contended that only property whose economic
usefulness cannot be adequately measured by its physical
condition or the passage of time and that may produce an uneven
stream of income is properly depreciated under the income
forecast method. Respondent’s position was based on the
reasoning of Rev. Rul. 60-358, 1960-2 C.B. 68. In that ruling,
the Commissioner determined that the usefulness of a television
film was more adequately measured by reference to the income it
produced than by the passage of time alone. The ruling
explicitly stated that the income forecast method was “limited in
its application to television films, taped shows for
reproduction, and other property of similar character.” Rev.
Rul. 60-358, 1960-2 C.B. at 70 (emphasis added). In later
revenue rulings, the Commissioner amplified Rev. Rul. 60-358,
1960-2 C.B. by authorizing the use of the income forecast method
to depreciate motion picture films, see Rev. Rul. 64-273, 1964-2
C.B. 62, book manuscripts, patents, and master recordings, see
Rev. Rul. 79-285, 1979-2 C.B. 91. These rulings were based on
section 167, which was, at the time the rulings were issued, the
only provision governing depreciation. In the late 1980's, after
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011