-12- delivered; and (7) the taxpayers agreed to look solely to the owners for all amounts due under the contracts. Accord Paragon Jewel Coal Co. v. Commissioner, 380 U.S. 624 (1965) (where the Court applied these seven factors to decide that certain coal mining contracts did not give the contract miners an economic interest in the coal in place). Our analysis of these factors in the light of the setting at hand leads to a conclusion contrary to that desired by petitioners. As to the first two factors, petitioners observe that GBI incurred costs to remove, transport, store, and crush the unusable materials. Petitioners argue that the costs which GBI incurred to remove the unusable materials constituted an investment in those materials that was more proprietary and meaningful than the investment made by the taxpayers in Parsons v. Smith, supra. We disagree. As was true in Parsons, GBI’s sole tangible investment was in movable equipment, and GBI recovered that investment through depreciation. Whereas petitioners focus primarily on GBI’s labor and other nontangible property costs in arguing that GBI’s investment was more proprietary and meaningful than the investment made by the taxpayers in Parsons, the fact of the matter is that the taxpayers in Parsons incurred similar nontangible property (labor) costs. The Supreme Court did not find that those labor costs in Parsons constituted an economic interest in the coal,Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011