- 15 - Petitioner reads section 1.471-3(b), Income Tax Regs., beyond its proper scope.8 As confirmed by a later portion of the regulation, the import of section 1.471-3(b), Income Tax Regs., is that a taxpayer's inventory cost includes only the net amount paid by the taxpayer for goods that the taxpayer has acquired: “To this net invoice price should be added transportation or other necessary charges incurred in acquiring possession of the goods.” Sec. 1.471-3(b), Income Tax Regs. (emphasis added). Accordingly, the “discount” to which section 1.471-3(b), Income Tax Regs., refers arises contemporaneously with the purchase of specific goods as inventory and is subtracted from their invoice price to determine their cost. The term does not include cash payments that the seller or manufacturer of goods paid to Westpac in exchange for Westpac's agreement to purchase goods from the same vendor in the indefinite future and to not purchase competing brands from other suppliers. Cf. Harkins v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-100. Based on the evidence, petitioner has failed to show that Westpac received the payments concurrently with its purchase of specific goods in inventory and that they are properly allocable as trade discounts off the 8 Petitioner's argument under this regulation is further undermined by the fact that Westpac failed to account for what it considered to be the earned portions of the advance trade discounts as reductions to its cost of goods sold on its 1990 income tax return.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011