- 19 -
section 1.55-1, Income Tax Regs., and the fact that the
Commissioner recognized this distinction in a technical advice
memorandum (Tech. Adv. Mem. 9722005 (Feb. 5, 1997)) issued as to
the facts of this case. The referenced sentences of the General
Explanation of the 1986 Act provide:
Structure of minimum tax as an alternative
system.–-For most purposes, the tax base for the new
alternative minimum tax is determined as though the
alternative minimum tax were a separate and independent
income tax system. Thus, for example, where a Code
provision refers to a “loss” of the taxpayer from an
activity, for purposes of the alternative minimum tax
the existence of a loss is determined with regard to
the items that are includable and deductible for
minimum tax, not regular tax, purposes. [General
Explanation of the 1986 Act, supra at 438.]
The referenced sentence in the preamble to section 1.55-1, Income
Tax Regs., provides (with a citation to the General Explanation
of the 1986 Act, supra at 438 n.9): “Congress generally intended
that the AMT be treated as a tax system separate from but
parallel to the regular tax system”. T.D. 8569, 59, 1994-2 C.B.
13. The technical advice memorandum reasons that the regular tax
regime operates parallel to the AMT regime. Tech. Adv. Mem.
9722005 (Feb. 5, 1997).
Respondent, in turn, acknowledges that the primary reading
of the AMT provisions requires that AMTI be calculated by
modifying taxable income by the items described in part VI. In a
manner that is openly inconsistent with respondent’s plain
reading of section 280C(a), however, respondent invites the Court
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011