- 134 -
Petitioner seeks an ITC for property that it placed in service
after placing the specifically identified property in service by
January 1, 1985. The property for which petitioner seeks an ITC
is not readily identifiable from the language in the amendment to
the Southern company contracts. We do not believe that the
transitional rules contemplated providing relief from the ITC
repeal when taxpayers upgrade their electrical systems, even if
the upgrades improved reliability. If we were to accept
petitioner’s position, any equipment that could somehow be traced
back to the purchase of power under the Southern company
contracts would be entitled to transition relief. The link
between the Southern company contracts and the property in issue
is too attenuated to be the type contemplated by Congress in
providing transition relief.
3. Are the DRI Documents TRA Section 204(a)(3)
Supply Contracts?
Developers of large projects applied to regional development
boards for permission to develop properties, and those regional
development boards required verification from FPL that the
electrical needs of the development would be satisfied.
Petitioner argues that the exchange of letters with respect to
the DRI projects constituted TRA section 204(a)(3) supply
contracts. Petitioner seeks ITCs for equipment related to the
DRI projects. This equipment was placed in service during 1988,
Page: Previous 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011