Physicians Insurance Company of Wisconsin, Inc. and Subsidiaries - Page 20




                                       - 20 -                                         
               necessary to establish the reasonableness of the                       
               deduction for “losses incurred.” [Sec. 1.832-4(a)(5)                   
               and (b), Income Tax Regs.]                                             
               Petitioner does not dispute the validity of the applicable             
          regulations but argues that they must be construed so as to                 
          accord deference to the unpaid loss estimates reflected on the              
          taxpayer’s annual statement, provided the taxpayer has used “good           
          faith business judgment” in preparing those estimates.                      
          Petitioner’s contention is at bottom a rehashing of long-rejected           
          arguments that the Code reflects a congressional expectation that           
          the estimates of unpaid losses used for tax purposes should                 
          conform to the precise figures shown on the annual statement.  In           
          rejecting such arguments and upholding the validity of the                  
          applicable regulations, the Court of Appeals for the First                  
          Circuit stated:                                                             
               Congress’s requirement that the N.A.I.C. [annual                       
               statement] form be followed as the only acceptable                     
               method for computing an insurance company’s gross                      
               income * * * [provides] no support * * * for the                       
               contention that the mere inclusion of certain figures                  
               on the congressionally-approved annual statement can                   
               prevent the Commissioner’s adjustment for the purpose                  
               of identifying tax deficiencies. * * * [Hanover Ins.                   
               Co. v. Commissioner, 598 F.2d 1211, 1217 (1st Cir.                     
               1979), affg. 69 T.C. 260, 272 (1977).]                                 
          The Court of Appeals for the First Circuit noted that accepting             
          such a contention would be “tantamount to a sanctification of the           
          estimated figures as well as the form itself, no matter how                 
          unfair or unreasonable.”  Id. (quoting Hanover Ins. Co. v.                  
          Commissioner, 65 T.C. 715, 719 (1976)); see also Pac. Employers             





Page:  Previous  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011