Hutton v. Commissioner

53 T.C. 37, 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 43
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedOctober 13, 1969
DocketDocket No. 1990-68
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 53 T.C. 37 (Hutton 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
Hutton v. Commissioner, 53 T.C. 37, 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 43 (tax 1969).

Opinion

OPINION

Tietjens, Judge:

The Commissioner determined a deficiency in petitioners’ Federal income tax for the taxable year 1964 in the amount of $17,968.80. The only issue presented is whether petitioners were required, upon the transfer of all the assets and liabilities of a sole proprietorship to a controlled corporation under section 351,1.R.C. 1954,1 to include as taxable income for that year, $38,904.12, which represents the balance of two reserves for bad debts at the date of the transfer.

All of the facts have been stipulated and the case has been submitted under Rule 30. The stipulations and the exhibits attached thereto are incorporated herein by this reference.

Robert P. Hutton and Marguerite C. Hutton (hereinafter referred to as petitioner and Marguerite or petitioners) are husband and wife whose legal residence at the time they filed their petition herein was Detroit, Mich.

Petitioners are calendar year taxpayers using the cash basis of accounting. They filed a joint individual income tax return for the calendar year 1964 with the district director of internal revenue, Detroit, Mich. Marguerite is a party herein solely by virtue of having joined with petitioner in filing the joint individual income tax return.

During 1964 and for several years prior thereto, petitioner owned and operated the East Detroit Loan Co. (hereinafter referred to as East Detroit), as a sole proprietorship. East Detroit kept its books on the cash basis of accounting, and was engaged in the business of making small loans and purchasing installment sales contracts.

In computing their taxable income petitioners availed themselves of section 166(c), I.R.C. 1954, relating to the reserve method of accounting for bad debts and over the years have taken deductions for additions to two reserves for bad debts. Subsequent collections, if any, of accounts written off were included in income in the year of collection. The activity in the reserves from January 1, 1964, to June 30, 1964, was:

Balance — Jan. 1, 1964_$37, 797. 01
Less: Worthless accounts written off as of June 30,1964_ 12, 850. 39
24,946. 62
Plus: Addition to reserve as of June 30,1964_ 13,957. 50
Balance — June 30, 1964_ 38,904.12

On July 1, 1964, all of the assets including loans receivable and installment sales contracts, with a face value of $972,604.22, and all the liabilities of East Detroit, were transferred to the East Detroit Loan Co. (hereinafter referred to as the corporation), a newly formed Michigan corporation, solely in exchange for stock of such corporation pursuant to section 351. All of such stock was issued to the petitioner.

On July 1,1964, the corporation set up a reserve for bad debts in the total amount of $38,904.12 and made a corresponding adjustment to its capital account.

Since the transfer on July 1,1964, the corporation has continued the business operations of East Detroit without interruption.

The Commissioner determined that upon the transfer under section 351 the balance in East Detroit’s reserve for bad debts of $38,904.12 was includable in petitioners’ gross income for taxable year 1964 and thereby a deficiency existed in the amount of $17,968.80.

We must decide whether the balance in East Detroit’s reserve for bad debts was includable in petitioners’ taxable income for taxable year 1964 or whether, by virtue of section 351, no taxable income was required to be reported upon the transfer to the controlled corporation.

We are informed by the Commissioner, on brief, that the above amount represents two. separate but closely related adjustments. First, the disallowance of a deduction for the claimed addition to the reserves as of June 30, 1964, in the amount of $13,957.50, and second, restoration of the balance of the bad debt reserves (after the above adjustment) in the amount of $24,946.62 to petitioners’ taxable income for taxable year 1964. We agree with the actions of the Commissioner in both respects.

As concerns the first adjustment, section 166 (a) provides that “There shall be allowed as a deduction any debt which becomes worthless within the taxable year.” However, in recognition of generally accepted accounting principles, the Code in section 166 (c) also provides that “in the discretion of the Secretary or his delegate” a taxpayer shall be allowed a “deduction for a reasonable addition to a reserve for bad debts.” In exercise of the discretion granted, section 1.166-4, Income Tax Kegs., sets forth the conditions under which deductions for additions to a reserve for bad debts may be taken:

(b) Reasonableness of addition to reserve — (1) Relevant factors. What constitutes a reasonable addition to a reserve £or bad debts shall be determined in the light of the facts existing at the close of the taxable year of the proposed addition. * * * [Emphasis supplied.]

Thus it is clear that any addition to a reserve for bad debts is to be made as of the end of the taxable year. In the instant case, at the end of taxable year 1964, petitioners had no loans receivable or installment sales contracts outstanding due to the earlier transfer to the corporation under section 351. Therefore since petitioners no longer owned any accounts, there was no future possibility of any bad debt losses arising therefrom. Hence any addition by petitioners to a reserve for bad debts at the close of the taxable year would be clearly unwarranted and contrary to the regulations. Similarly the addition to the reserve as of June 30,1964, is also unwarranted in that such date is not the end of the taxable year, as specified in the regulations. Any future bad debt losses would be those of the corporation and not of the petitioners, and it would be for the corporation to make any additions to the reserve at the end of its taxable year. Max Schuster, 50 T.C. 98 (1968); Bird Management, Inc., 48 T.C. 586, 594-595 (1967), and cases cited therein. Accordingly, the Commissioner’s action regarding the addition to the reserve for bad debts is upheld.

Turning to the second adjustment, it is well settled that whenever the balance in a reserve for bad debts will no longer be needed, such balance is to be restored to income in the year the need for it ceases to exist. Max Schuster, supra; Bird Management, Inc., supra; J. E. Hawes Corp., 44 T.C. 705 (1965), and cases cited therein.

A reserve is not an asset or a liability, rather it is a contra account, a medium of disclosure and as such it has no existence aside from the asset it offsets. A reserve is an estimate of possible future unoollecti-bility and as such serves to reduce present income. When it becomes apparent that such estimated losses will never in fact be sustained, good accounting practice requires that any unused balance in such a reserve be restored to income. Max Schuster, supra; Geyer, Cornell & Newell, Inc., 6 T.C. 96 (1946).

Petitioners, over the years, have enjoyed a tax benefit by virtue of their accounting practice and it is only proper that this benefit now be restored since the factors occasioning it have ceased to be operative.

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

Related

Bohannon v. Commissioner
1997 T.C. Memo. 153 (U.S. Tax Court, 1997)
Foster v. Comm'r
80 T.C. No. 3 (U.S. Tax Court, 1983)
Hutton v. Commissioner
53 T.C. 37 (U.S. Tax Court, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 T.C. 37, 1969 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 43, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hutton-v-commissioner-tax-1969.