- 23 -
The tanks are massive in size and have economic useful lives of
60 to 70 years, and (2) AFEs for building new tanks at terminals
do not reflect an intent to relocate the new tanks at some later
date. In addition, respondent argues that the need for internal
bracing when relocating intact tanks with internal roof support
columns demonstrates that the tanks were designed to remain
permanently in place.
In Whiteco Indus., Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 672, we
concluded that the outdoor advertising signs were “not designed
or constructed to last permanently.” The signs were designed to
last only for the duration of the advertising contract, about 5
years, at which time the signs would require “substantial
renovation”, including a new sign face and various repairs. Id.
We did not require the taxpayer to show that the taxpayer
actually intended to relocate the property at a later date. Id.;
see also JFM, Inc. & Subs. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-239
(same).
Although the property at issue in the present case is quite
large, for this second Whiteco factor, the focus of our inquiry
is on the permanence of the property’s design and construction.
The property’s size is not determinative. See, e.g., Estate of
Morgan v. Commissioner, supra at 480 (floating docks at issue had
one walkway that was approximately 290 feet long).
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011