- 2 - SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OPINION HAINES, Judge: On April 12, 2006, pursuant to Rule 161, respondent filed a motion for reconsideration of this Court’s Memorandum Findings of Fact and Opinion in Anschutz Co. & Subs. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-40 (Anschutz I).1 In his motion, respondent alleges that this Court erred “by failing to address whether Qwest’s Common Indirect Costs directly benefited its section 263A retained assets, and * * * by not requiring those costs be allocated to Qwest’s section 263A retained assets.” This Supplemental Memorandum Opinion addresses respondent’s allegations of error. Background We adopt the findings of fact in our prior Memorandum Findings of Fact and Opinion, Anschutz I. For convenience and clarity, we repeat below the facts necessary for the disposition of this motion. During the years in issue, Qwest entered into contracts to install conduit (conduit installation projects) and to pull fiberoptic cable (IRU projects) for third-party customers.2 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. 2 The years in issue were July 31, 1994 through 1996. Before and during the years in issue, Qwest was known by different names, but for convenience, it will be referred to only (continued...)Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011