Emery Kinkead, Inc. v. Commissioner

35 T.C. 152, 1960 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 40
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedOctober 28, 1960
DocketDocket No. 66515
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 35 T.C. 152 (Emery Kinkead, 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.

Bluebook
Emery Kinkead, Inc. v. Commissioner, 35 T.C. 152, 1960 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 40 (tax 1960).

Opinion

Bruce, Judge:

This proceeding involves deficiencies in income tax for the years and in the amounts as follows:

Year Deficiency
1951_ $3,655.60
1952_ 2,066.56
1953_ 93. 87

The sole issue is whether compensation for services rendered by petitioner, an accrual basis taxpayer, during the calendar years 1951,1952, and 1953, but not determined until February 29, 1952, February 28, 1953, and February 28, 1954, respectively, or shortly thereafter, was accruajble in the years when the services were rendered. Other issues have been agreed to by the parties in the stipulation and shall be given effect under the Rule 50 computation.

FINDINGS OF FACT.

The stipulated facts are so found and are incorporated herein by this reference.

Petitioner was incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Kentucky on November 21, 1932, for the purpose of purchasing, acquiring, leasing, selling, mortgaging, and trading in real estate and improvements, building homes, apartment houses, and developing housing projects, subdivisions, and transacting real estate business of every kind and description. Petitioner’s principal place of business is at 614 East Broadway, Louisville, Kentucky. During the years 1951, 1952, and 1953 petitioner regularly kept its records and reported its income for Federal income tax purposes on the basis of an accrual method of accounting and it filed its Federal income tax returns on a calendar year basis for the taxable years 1951, 1952, and 1953 with the district director of internal revenue, Louisville, Kentucky.

During the years 1951,1952, and 1953 the capital stock of petitioner consisted of 1,500 shares of common stock of a par value of $10 per share which was held as follows:

Number of Shareholder shares
Emery Kinkead_1, 406
Mary S. Kinkead (Mother of Emery)_ 94

During the period January 1,1951, through February 28,1954, Emery Kinkead was president of petitioner.

Homestead Development Co., hereinafter called Homestead, was incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Kentucky on January 23, 1950, for the purpose of engaging in the construction of homes, dwellings, and apartment houses, developing housing projects, subdivisions, and other real estate developments, and transacting business in real estate of every kind and character. During the years 1951, 1952, and 1953 the capital stock of Homestead consisted of 10 shares of common stock of a par value of $100 per share which was held as follows:

Number of Shareholder shares
Emery Kinkead_ 8
Mary S. Kinkead_ 1
J. Clay Murphey_ 1

During the period March 1, 1951, through February 28, 1954, Emery Kinkead was president of Homestead.

During the period involved herein, Homestead kept its records and reported its income for Federal income tax purposes on the basis of an accrual method of accounting. Homestead filed its income tax returns on a fiscal year basis for the taxable years ended February 29, 1952, February 28,1953, and February 28,1954.

Petitioner occupies and operates a building at 614 East Broadway, Louisville, Kentucky, for the conduct of its business including ofiices for sales, executive, accounting, architectural, and real estate management departments and these facilities and personnel are furnished and made available to other corporations, including Homestead, which, in turn, pay a service fee to petitioner for the facilities and personnel made available to them.

At the time Homestead was incorporated, it was arranged that petitioner would render certain services and provide certain facilities necessary for Homestead’s operation in exchange for which Homestead would pay petitioner an annual service fee based on what was fair and reasonable for the services rendered and facilities furnished to Homestead in each of its fiscal years. It was agreed that the amount of the annual service fee would be fixed by Emery Kinkead, in his capacity as president of Homestead, at the close of each fiscal year of Homestead or as soon thereafter as possible.

During the fiscal years of Homestead ended February 29, 1952, February 28, 1953, and February 28, 1954, petitioner rendered services and furnished facilities and personnel to Homestead. The service fee paid by Homestead to petitioner for each of these fiscal years was based on a percentage of the cost of construction completed and sold by Homestead during each of these fiscal years. The service fee rate for each year was determined solely by Emery Kinkead at the end of Homestead’s fiscal year or shortly thereafter. According to the books and records of Homestead, the cost of construction sold by Homestead, the rate and the amount of the service fee paid by Homestead to petitioner for each of these years are as follows:

[[Image here]]

The amounts of $16,567.69, $15,612.08, and $21,486.33 were paid to petitioner by Homestead on or shortly after the close of Homestead’s fiscal years ended February 29,1952, February 28,1953, and February 28, 1954, respectively, and were reported by petitioner as income for Federal income tax purposes on its Federal income tax returns for its calendar years 1952, 1953, and 1954, respectively.

The accounting books and records of Homestead for, its fiscal years ended February 29, 1952, February 28, 1953, and February 28, 1954, were kept by employees of petitioner. This was one of the services rendered by petitioner, to Homestead during these years.

Respondent has determined that for the taxable years 1951, 1952, and 1953, petitioner should accrue as income amounts due it from Homestead for services rendered by it for such calendar years, and, therefore, its taxable income for Federal income tax purposes should be adjusted as follows:

OPINION.

Respondent seeks to include in petitioner’s income for the calendar years 1951,1952, and 1953 compensation for services rendered during those years, the amount of which was never determined by the contracting parties, which computed the fee for Homestead’s fiscal years only. The issue involved concerns a question of accounting, the disposition of which is controlled by sections 411 and 42,21.E.C. 1939.

The applicable principles were stated by this Court in San Francisco Stevedoring Co., 8 T.C. 222, 225:

A taxpayer, using an accrual method of accounting, must accrue an item in the year in which the taxpayer acquires a fixed and unconditional right to receive the amount, even though actual payment is to be deferred. There must he no contingency or unreasonable uncertainty qualifying the payment or receipt. Income does not accrue to a taxpayer using an accrual method until there arises in him a fixed or unconditional right to receive it.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Schneer v. Commissioner
97 T.C. No. 45 (U.S. Tax Court, 1991)
Bentley Laboratories, Inc. v. Commissioner
77 T.C. 152 (U.S. Tax Court, 1981)
Frelbro Corp. v. Commissioner
36 T.C. 864 (U.S. Tax Court, 1961)
Emery Kinkead, Inc. v. Commissioner
35 T.C. 152 (U.S. Tax Court, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 T.C. 152, 1960 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/emery-kinkead-inc-v-commissioner-tax-1960.