- 16 -
Payless would not qualify for transitional relief under TRA
section 203(b)(1)(C) even if it could establish the total cost of
the building because Payless did not have a written specific plan
and did not incur or commit to more than one-half of the cost of
the equipped building.
TRA section 203(b)(1)(C) does not explicitly state whose
“written specific plan” will satisfy the requirement of the
section. However, the conference report supports the proposition
that the “written specific plan” referred to in the section must
be the plan of the taxpayer claiming the credit. The conference
report states:
Under the equipped building rule, the conference
agreement [repeal of the ITC] will not apply to
equipment and machinery to be used in the completed
building, and also incidental machinery, equipment, and
structures adjacent to the building (referred to here
as appurtenances) which are necessary to the planned
use of the building, where the following conditions are
met:
(1) The construction (or reconstruction or
erection) or acquisition of the building, machinery,
and equipment was pursuant to a specific written plan
of a taxpayer in existence on March 1, 1986 (December
31, 1985, for the investment tax credit); and
(2) More than 50 percent of the adjusted basis of
the building and the equipment and machinery to be used
in it (as contemplated by the written plan) was
attributable to property the cost of which was incurred
or committed by March 1, 1986 (December 31, 1985, for
the investment tax credit), and construction commenced
on or before March 1, 1986 (December 31, 1985, for the
investment tax credit).
The written plan for an equipped building may be
modified to a minor extent after March 1, 1986,
(December 31, 1985, for the investment tax credit) and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011