- 70 -
one of the tests in order for the step transaction doctrine to
operate. Associated Wholesale Grocers, Inc. v. United States, 927
F.2d 1517, 1527-1528 (10th Cir. 1991) (finding end result test
inappropriate but applying the step transaction doctrine using the
interdependence test). We now turn to the application of these
three tests to the transaction involved herein.
a. Binding Commitment Test
We first consider the application of the binding commitment
test. Petitioners posit that RD Leasing was not bound to engage in
the transaction until it actually entered the transaction in
December 1993, and that Messrs. Parmentier and de la Barre
d’Erquelinnes formed Andantech-Foreign independent of any
commitment by RD Leasing. For the reasons set forth below, we do
not believe it is appropriate to apply the binding commitment test
to our step transaction analysis in this case.
The purpose of the binding commitment test is to promote
certainty in tax planning; it is the most rigorous limitation of
the step transaction doctrine. It is seldom used and is applicable
only where a substantial period of time has passed between the
steps that are subject to scrutiny. Thus, it is not an appropriate
test to apply to the transactions before us inasmuch as the
transactions were prearranged by Comdisco, completed in 6 months,
and fell entirely within a single tax year. See, e.g., Associated
Wholesale Grocers, Inc. v. United States, supra at 1522 n.6
(rejecting use of the binding commitment test because the case did
Page: Previous 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011