- 5 -
Respondent conceded that petitioner is entitled to deduct
the expenses for operating the aircraft for flights attributable
to the lumber business, the air charter business, the nonvacation
flights, and the director’s flights.
Discussion
The parties’ cross-motions for partial summary judgment2
involve employee fringe benefits. Normally, answers to such
matters may be found in sections 61, 162, 132, and related
sections. Here, however, we are confronted with the more vexing
combination of those sections with section 274, which provides
special rules for disallowance of certain deductions in
connection with entertainment, amusement, or recreation
activities. Simplifying matters, the parties agree that the
value of the vacation use of the aircraft is reportable by the
employees as compensation and that petitioner is entitled to
2 Rule 121(b) provides that summary adjudication upon all or
any part of the legal issues in controversy may be rendered if
the pleadings and admissions show that no genuine issue exists as
to any material fact and that a decision may be rendered as a
matter of law. See Sundstrand Corp. v. Commissioner, 98 T.C.
518, 520 (1992), affd. 17 F.3d 965 (7th Cir. 1994); Zaentz v.
Commissioner, 90 T.C. 753, 754 (1988); Naftel v. Commissioner, 85
T.C. 527, 529 (1985). The moving party bears the burden of
proving that there is no genuine issue of material fact, and
factual inferences will be read in a manner most favorable to the
party opposing summary judgment. See Dahlstrom v. Commissioner,
85 T.C. 812, 821 (1985); Marshall v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 267,
271 (1985). The facts necessary to consider the questions
presented here by each motion are contained in pleadings and
other documents in the record and are not controverted.
Consequently, the issue herein is ripe for partial summary
judgment.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011