Bank One Corporation - Page 92

                                        -174-                                         
               Petitioner argues that its burden as to section 446(b) is to           
          prove simply that FNBC’s method of reporting its swaps income was           
          reasonable.  We disagree.  We understand section 446(b) to                  
          require that a method of accounting clearly reflect income and              
          not that it simply be reasonable.  A taxpayer’s method of                   
          accounting, although believed by the taxpayer to be reasonable,             
          may not necessarily be a method which clearly reflects the                  
          taxpayer’s income for purposes of Federal income taxes.  Such is            
          especially so considering that the Commissioner is given broad              
          discretion under section 446(b) to determine whether an                     
          accounting method clearly reflects income, and that his exercise            
          of authority under that section is given “much latitude” and                
          cannot be disturbed unless “clearly unlawful” or “plainly                   
          arbitrary”.  Thor Power Tool Co. v. Commissioner, supra at                  
          532-533; Lucas v. Am. Code Co., 280 U.S. 445, 449 (1930); Am.               
          Fletcher Corp. v. United States, supra at 438.  Moreover, it is             
          well engrained in our tax jurisprudence that a taxpayer                     
          challenging the Commissioner’s exercise of authority under                  
          section 446(b) bears a heavy burden of proving that the                     
          Commissioner’s determination is “clearly unlawful” or “plainly              
          arbitrary”.  Thor Power Tool Co. v. Commissioner, supra at 532-             
          533; Lucas v. Structural Steel Co., 281 U.S. 264, 271 (1930);               
          Lucas v. Am. Code Co., supra at 449.  See also Am. Fletcher Corp.           







Page:  Previous  164  165  166  167  168  169  170  171  172  173  174  175  176  177  178  179  180  181  182  183  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011