Pelaez and Sons, Inc. - Page 24




                                       - 24 -                                         
               any material item.  A material item is any item that                   
               involves the proper time for the inclusion of the item                 
               in income or the taking of a deduction.  In determining                
               whether a practice involves the proper time for the                    
               inclusion of an item in income or the taking of a                      
               deduction, the relevant question is generally whether                  
               the practice permanently changes the amount of taxable                 
               income over the taxpayer’s lifetime.  If the practice                  
               does not permanently affect the taxpayer’s lifetime                    
               taxable income, but does or could change the taxable                   
               year in which taxable income is reported, it involves                  
               timing and is therefore considered a method of                         
               accounting.  See Rev. Proc. 91-31, 1991-1 C.B. 566.                    
               Petitioner argues that the corporation was on the cash                 
          method of accounting and did not change from that for any year,             
          including 1991.  In addition, petitioner contends that in 1989              
          and 1990 the corporation intended to defer deducting the costs              
          until such time as it was able to determine whether it met the “2           
          years or less” test.  In that regard, petitioner argues that                
          exercising the election to deduct or capitalize in section 1.162-           
          12(a), Income Tax Regs., does not constitute a change in the                
          accounting method.  Petitioner, relying on Wilbur v.                        
          Commissioner, 43 T.C. 322 (1964), contends that the choice                  
          available under the regulation is not a change in the accounting            
          method.  Respondent contends that the holding in Wilbur is                  
          contrary to petitioner’s interpretation.                                    
               Wilbur, which was decided prior to the 1969 enactment of               
          section 278, does not address the question of change of                     
          accounting method, and, accordingly does not support either                 
          party’s argument on that point.  See Wilbur v. Commissioner,                






Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011