Metro Leasing and Development Corporation, East Bay Chevrolet Company, a Corporation - Page 3




                                                - 3 -                                                   
            reasonable needs of its business.  See secs. 531-537;2  Metro                               
            Leasing & Dev. Corp. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-119.  We                              
            also decided the amount of reasonable compensation for                                      
            petitioner’s officers.  To reflect our holding and to adjust for                            
            agreed items, the parties were required to compute the amount of                            
            resulting income tax and accumulated earnings tax liabilities                               
            pursuant to Rule 155 computation procedures.                                                
                  The parties, in docket No. 8054-99, disagree about the                                
            computation of the accumulated earnings tax liability.  That tax                            
            liability is computed by applying the accumulated earnings tax                              
            rate to a corporation’s accumulated taxable income.  Accumulated                            
            taxable income is computed by making certain adjustments to                                 
            taxable income.  Respondent computed a proposed accumulated                                 
            earnings tax liability of $56,248, and petitioner disagreed,                                
            contending that three additional adjustments should be made to                              
            respondent’s computation.  If any of petitioner’s proposed                                  
            adjustments are sustained, the resulting accumulated earnings tax                           
            liability would be within a range of amounts from zero to                                   
            $51,074.                                                                                    
                  Petitioner argues that, in computing accumulated taxable                              
            income, respondent failed to reduce taxable income by the                                   


                  2 All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in                          
            effect for the year in issue, and all Rule references are to the                            
            Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, unless otherwise                                 
            indicated.                                                                                  





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