Michael A. McGrath and Frances Y. McGrath - Page 15




                                       - 15 -                                         
               construct at his own cost a building on the property, the              
               lessee, not the lessor, is entitled to a deduction for the             
               depreciation of the building.  See Reisinger v.                        
               Commissioner, 144 F.2d 475 (C.A. 2, 1944), affirming a                 
               Memorandum Opinion of this Court; Friend v. Commissioner,              
               119 F.2d 969 (C.A. 7, 1941), affirming a Memorandum Opinion            
               of this Court; Commissioner v. Pearson, 188 F.2d 72 (C.A. 5,           
               1951), reversing and remanding on other grounds 13 T.C. 851;           
               First Nat. Bank of Kansas City v. Nee, 190 F.2d 61 (C.A. 8,            
               1951); Goelet v. United States, 266 F.2d 881 (C.A. 2, 1959);           
               Schubert v. Commissioner, 286 F.2d 573 (C.A. 4, 1961),                 
               affirming 33 T.C. 1048.                                                
                    The lessee, who is obligated to make improvements to              
               the realty, is entitled to recover his capital outlay by               
               deductions for depreciation.  His right to the deductions is           
               not altered by the fact that, under doctrines of local law,            
               legal title to the improvements may reside in the lessor.              
               In such situations it is the lessee, not the lessor, who               
               suffers the economic loss as the property deteriorates, and            
               who is entitled to the statutory allowance.  Helvering v.              
               Lazarus & Co., 308 U.S. 252 (1939); First Nat. Bank of                 
               Kansas City v. Nee, supra.  The party claiming depreciation            
               must have some investment in the wasting asset.  Detroit               
               Edison Co. v. Commissioner, 319 U.S. 98 (1943).                        
          To the same effect, see sec. 1.162-11(b), Income Tax Regs.11                



               11                                                                     
               Sec. 1.162-11.  Rentals.--                                             
                         *    *    *    *    *    *    *                              
                    (b) Improvements by lessee on lessor’s property.--(1)             
               The cost to a lessee of erecting buildings or making                   
               permanent improvements on property of which he is the lessee           
               is a capital investment, and is not deductible as a business           
               expense. * * *  [Emphasis added.]                                      
               The balance of this provision has been superseded by the               
          enactment of sec. 168, in particular, sec. 168(i)(8)(A).                    
          However, the statutory language does not affect the continued               
          validity of that part of the regulation set forth in this note.             
          For an example of this continued validity, see Nelson v.                    
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-212.                                          






Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011