- 24 -
consider these factors on an ad hoc basis.
With respect to the trellising components, they are quite
similar to fencing with the major difference being that one is
intended to keep things in or out and the other to support grape-
growing equipment or train grapevines. Both have posts that are
set in the ground and some form of wire as components. Clearly,
a trellis may have more components and/or be more complex than a
fence, but both are similarly constructed and maintained.
In that regard, Rev. Proc. 87-56, supra, to the extent
pertinent here, categorizes the 10-year class life as one
including machinery and equipment, grain bins, and fences but no
other land improvements, that are used in the production of
vines. In that regard, petitioners contend that trellising is
farming equipment and not a land improvement. Conversely,
respondent contends the trellising is an improvement to land.
Adding to the complexity of categorizing the trellising in one
class life category or the other is case precedent holding that
posts anchored in concrete were not considered permanent
improvements to realty. Whiteco Indus., Inc. v. Commissioner,
supra. In this case, the trellising posts are the component by
which the trellis is attached to the ground. We note that
petitioners did not use concrete to fix the posts in place.
Therefore, petitioners’ position in this case is stronger than
the taxpayer’s position in Whiteco.
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007