Ackerman Buick, Inc. v. Commissioner
This text of 1973 T.C. Memo. 224 (Ackerman Buick, Inc. v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
HALL, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency of $8,538.86 in petitioner's 1967 Federal income tax. The sole issue to be decided 1 is whether petitioner is entitled to deduct the cost ($10,758) of a roadway it dedicated to the City of Ferguson, Missouri, either as a charitable contribution or as a business expense.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts have been stipulated, and are found accordingly. 2
Petitioner, Ackerman Buick, Inc., is a Delaware corporation with its*65 principal place of business in St. Louis, Missouri. Petitioner filed its 1967 Federal income tax return with the district director of internal revenue at St. Louis, Missouri.
Petitioner entered into a Buick automobile franchise agreement with General Motors in 1964. It thereafter acquired the assets of Kuhs Buick, Inc., located in the City of St. Louis, and carried on business at that location for approximately 18 months, after which it moved to its present location in the City of Ferguson, Missouri.
At the time of entering into the 1964 franchise agreement, General Motors and petitioner understood that petitioner would acquire a new location in northwest St. Louis County, Missouri. Pursuant to this understanding, J. W. Ackerman, petitioner's president, viewed various sites for a possible location of the agency. Ackerman's attention focused on an 8.766 acre tract of land located on Pershall Road in the City of Ferguson. At the time of his initial investigation in 1964, this land was zoned by the City of Ferguson for single family residential use. In order for petitioner to locate its automobile agency there, it had to have the land rezoned to permit commercial use.
On*66 April 7, 1964, petitioner entered into an Option Contract with the owner of the 8.766 acre parcel which 3 granted petitioner the right to purchase the land, subject to approval by General Motors, and subject to rezoning of the property to commercial use by the City of Ferguson. The Option Contract provided in part:
It is further understood and agreed that this contract is subject to rezoning by City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis, Missouri in order to permit Ackerman Buick, Inc. to make commercial use of the property as an automotive sales and service agency. However, if one of the aforementioned municipalities refuses to consider or grant a petition for rezoning then it shall be sufficient if that municipality will irrevocably bind itself by agreement to accept a rezoning determination by the other. In the event said rezoning is not granted, this contract shall be null and void and total $8000.00 earnest deposit refunded to Ackerman Buick, Inc. All costs in connection with said rezoning shall be paid by Ackerman Buick, Inc. and seller shall not be responsible for any of said costs.
On April 13, 1964, petitioner filed a petition for rezoning the property from residential*67 to commercial use with the City of Ferguson, and the matter was referred to the City's Planning Commission. There followed a series of communications and negotiations between petitioner's attorney and various City officials.
During these negotiations, representatives of the City indicated they wanted petitioner to dedicate to the City a road across the parcel and to pave it, in order to extend Trask Drive from its existing dead end through to Pershall Road. 4
Petitioner's attorney wrote a letter to the Ferguson Planning Commission, dated June 16, 1964, which stated:
In connection with the pending Petition for Rezoning by Ackerman Buick, Inc., please be advised that the corporation represents that it will dedicate to the City of Ferguson a certain tract of land across the subject property as a roadway, and will improve said roadway, in accordance with the specification of the ordinances of the City, across its property and to Pershall Road across other property which may be made available to the City. This representation is made on the expectancy of the corporation that it will be able to develop the property for its commercial purposes after, and in the event of, re-zoning*68 as requested in its petition.
Petitioner's attorney further defined petitioner's position in a letter, dated July 9, 1964, to an official of the City of Ferguson. Therein he stated the following:
Because there have been misunderstandings which, although resolved, are never desirable, I deem it advisable to set out the present posture of our development, and our commitment to the City of Ferguson, so that no future doubt can arise as we proceed.
* * *
[The Option Contract] is contingent on a rezoning of the 8.766 acres as commercial, and thus we can not and will not acquire legal title until and, unless the City Council sees fit to grant our rezoning. At my initial appearance before the Planning Commission, the access problem to Pershall Road was noted, and a meeting ensued at the site, at which I understood that the City would require not only a dedication of a roadway, but we would have to assume the burden of paving across our property.
* * * 5
In addition, if the Council is inclined to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission, that the area west of the roadway not be rezoned commercial, we must consider a road course which will be economically advantageous.
*69 * * *
Notwithstanding, this is to reaffirm that, if Ackerman Buick, Inc., acquires the property for development as an automotive sales agency, it is committed to dedicate a road course across its property to continue Trask Drive, to join the private road leading to Pershall Road, and will determine the exact course at the earliest possible time, which I presently hope can be before July 14, 1964.
In another letter to the same City official, dated October 6, 1964, petitioner's attorney wrote:
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1973 T.C. Memo. 224, 32 T.C.M. 1061, 1973 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 64, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ackerman-buick-inc-v-commissioner-tax-1973.