Fact:

Peaceful. an accrual footing taxpayer. provides a full line of funeral services and sells goods related to those services. Peaceful has attempted to plan an attack that allows clients to prepay for their funeral goods and services.

Issue:
The sum prepaid under Peaceful’s plan constitutes prepaid income that must be included in Peaceful’s income ( and hence capable to revenue enhancement ) in the twelvemonth in which it is received.

Decision:
Peaceful should travel in front and pay the audit based on the facts. The IRS is right harmonizing to the revenue enhancement codification and Torahs.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Analysis:
Prepaid income revenue enhancement is a signifier of postpaid disbursal. The most common ground why prepayment on income revenue enhancements occurs is due to over-estimation of revenue enhancement sedimentations. In this state of affairs. revenue enhancements are estimated from the fiscal of the old twelvemonth. These estimated revenue enhancements are paid. Then. when the year-end revenue enhancements are found to be less than the revenue enhancements paid before. prepayment on income revenue enhancements has occurred. This prepayment can make one of two consequences: a revenue enhancement refund or the recognition written off towards the revenue enhancement liability of the following period.

Harmonizing to the Perry Funeral Home. Inc. v. Commissioner. TC Memo 2003-340. Code Sec ( s ) 451. PERRY FUNERAL HOME. INC. . Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE. Respondent Case. Time for describing income—accrual method—refundable sedimentation vs. progress payments—pre-need funeral contracts. Accrual-method funeral place corp. decently reported monies received for Massachusetts regulated pre-need funeral service contracts in twelvemonth services were really rendered. instead than in payment twelvemonth as IRS contended: following Supreme Court case in point. payments were refundable sedimentations. non beforehand payments. where contracts contained open-ended cancellation and refund rights that left taxpayer without complete dominionand control over financess. Notably. under contracts’ field linguistic communication and pursuant to Massachusetts regs ] . clients controlled whether or when refund would be made ; and fact that cancellation/refund rights were seldom exercised was irrelevant.

Because Peaceful were having prepaid income they will hold to pay revenue enhancements on the prepaid gross revenues that were being made within 1 twelvemonth of the sale. The Internal Revenue Code imposes a Federal revenue enhancement on the nonexempt income of every corporation. Sec. 11 ( a ) . Section 61 ( a ) specifies that gross income for intents of ciphering such nonexempt income means “all income from whatever beginning derived” . Encompassed within this wide dictum are all “undeniable accessions to wealth. clearly realized. and over which the taxpayers have complete rule. ” Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co. . 348 U. S. 426. 431 [ 47 AFTR 162 ] ( 1955 ) . Stated otherwise. gross income includes net incomes unaccompanied by an duty to refund and without limitation as to their temperament. James v. United States. 366 U. S. 213. 219 [ 7 AFTR 2d 1361 ] ( 1961 ) .

Section 451 ( a ) provides the following general regulation sing the twelvemonth in which points of gross income should be included in nonexempt income:
The sum of any point of gross income shall be included in the gross income for the nonexempt twelvemonth in which received by the taxpayer. unless. under the method of accounting used in calculating nonexempt income. such sum is to be decently accounted for as of a different period. Consistent with the rule of subdivision 451. subdivision 446 ( a ) and ( B ) directs that taxpayers are to calculate nonexempt income utilizing the method of accounting on a regular basis employed for maintaining their books. with the exclusion that “if the method used does non clearly reflect income. the calculation of nonexempt income shall be made under such method as. in the sentiment of the Secretary. does clearly reflect income. ” In general. the accrual method is designated a allowable method of accounting for intents of subdivision 446. Sec. 446 ( degree Celsius ) ( 2 ) . Under the accrual method. income is to be included for the nonexempt twelvemonth when all events have occurred that fix the right to have the income and the sum of the income can be determined with sensible truth.

Mentions:

Secs. 1. 446-1 ( degree Celsius ) ( 1 ) ( two ) . 1. 451- 1 ( a ) . Income Tax Regs. Typically. all events that fix the right to have income have occurred upon the earliest of the undermentioned to take topographic point: The income is ( 1 ) really or constructively received ; ( 2 ) due ; or ( 3 ) earned by public presentation. Schlude v. Commissioner. 372 U. S. 128. 133 [ 11 AFTR 2d 751 ] ( 1963 ) ; Johnson v. Commissioner. 108 T. C. 448. 459 ( 1997 ) . affd. in portion. revd. in portion and remanded on another land 184 F. 3d 786 [ 84 AFTR 2d 99-5306 ] ( 8th Cir. 1999 ) . [ pg. 1971 ] As caselaw using the above criterions has evolved. it has become good established that sums representing progress payments for goods or services are includable in gross income in the twelvemonth received. Schlude v. Commissioner. supra ; AAA v. United States. 367 U. S. 687 [ 7 AFTR 2d 1618 ] ( 1961 ) ; Auto. Club of Mich. v. Commissioner. 353 U. S. 180 [ 50 AFTR 1967 ] ( 1957 ) ; RCA Corp. v. United States. 664 F. 2d 881 [ 48 AFTR 2d 81-6164 ] ( 2d Cir. 1981 ) ; see besides Commissioner v. Indianapolis Power & A ; Light Co. . 493 U. S. 203. 207 & A ; n. 3 [ 65 AFTR 2d 90-394 ] ( 1990 ) .

In contrast. sums decently characterized as loans. sedimentations. or trust financess are non includable upon reception. Commissioner v. Indianapolis Power & A ; Light Co. . supra at 207-208 ; Johnson v. Commissioner. supra at 467-475 ; Oak Indus. . Inc. v. Commissioner. 96 T. C. 559. 563-564 ( 1991 ) ; Angelus Funeral Home v. Commissioner. 47 T. C. 391. 397 ( 1967 ) . affd. 407 F. 2d 210 [ 23 AFTR 2d 69-673 ] ( 9th Cir. 1969 ) . The rationale underlying this differentiation is that money received in the capacity entirely of a borrower. depositary. agent. or fiducial. because it is accompanied by an duty to refund or limitation as to temperament. is non income at all. See Commissioner v. Indianapolis Power & A ; Light Co. . supra at 208 n. 3 ; Johnson v. Commissioner. supra at 474-475. Hence. no inquiry of the timing of income accumulation is presented. See Commissioner v. Indianapolis Power & A ; Light Co. . supra at 208 n. 3 ; Johnson v. Commissioner. supra at 474-475

x

Hi!
I'm Niki!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out