Square D Company and Subsidiaries - Page 29




                                       - 29 -                                         
             RUWE, J., dissenting:  Section 267(a)(2) prevents an accrual             
          basis taxpayer from currently deducting any amount payable to a             
          related person if the amount is not currently includable in the             
          payee’s gross income because of the payee’s method of accounting.           
          Section 267(a)(3) authorizes regulations to apply the matching              
          principle of section 267(a)(2) in cases where the payee is a                
          foreign person.  As explained in the Commissioner’s Notice 89-84:           
                   Section 267(a)(2) of the Code provides generally                   
             that a taxpayer may not deduct any amount owed to a                      
             related party (as defined in section 267(b)) until it is                 
             includible in the payee’s gross income if the mismatching                
             arises because the parties use different methods of                      
             accounting.  Section 267(a)(3) authorizes the Secretary                  
             to issue regulations applying this principle to payments                 
             to related foreign persons. * * *  [Notice 89-84, 1989-2                 
             C.B. 402; emphasis added.]                                               
          Nevertheless, section 1.267(a)-3, Income Tax Regs., puts accrual            
          method taxpayers, who could otherwise deduct interest payable to            
          a related foreign person, on the cash method of accounting, even            
          though, pursuant to a treaty, the interest is not, and never will           
          be, includable in the payee’s gross income.  The regulation would           
          disallow the deduction for accrued interest regardless of the               
          fact that the exclusion from the payee’s gross income has nothing           
          to do with payee’s method of accounting.  As more fully set forth           
          in our plurality opinion in Tate & Lyle, Inc. & Subs. v.                    
          Commissioner, 103 T.C. 656 (1994), the regulation goes beyond the           
          scope of the regulatory authority specifically granted in section           








Page:  Previous  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011