Load, Inc. v. Comm'r

2007 T.C. Memo. 51, 93 T.C.M. 969, 2007 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 51
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedMarch 6, 2007
DocketNos. 7287-02, 7294-02
StatusUnpublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 2007 T.C. Memo. 51 (Load, Inc. v. Comm'r) 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
Load, Inc. v. Comm'r, 2007 T.C. Memo. 51, 93 T.C.M. 969, 2007 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 51 (tax 2007).

Opinion

LOAD, Inc., Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent COAD, Inc., Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Load, Inc. v. Comm'r
Nos. 7287-02, 7294-02
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 2007-51; 2007 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 51; 93 T.C.M. (CCH) 969;
March 6, 2007, Filed
*51 John F. Daniels III, Julio M. Zapata, and Eric J. Boyd, for petitioners.
Charles B. Burnett, for respondent.
Swift, Stephen J.

STEPHEN J. SWIFT

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

SWIFT, Judge: Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioners' Federal income taxes for their separate taxable years ending September 30, 2000, as follows:

PetitionerDeficiency
LOAD, Inc.$ 16,589
COAD, Inc.$ 23,954

Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue.

The issue for decision is whether certain costs relating to manufactured homes that petitioners owned and placed on retail sales lots in order to assist local independent salespersons in the sale of manufactured homes may be currently deducted under section 162 as ordinary and necessary business expenses or whether they should be included under section 263A in petitioners' inventory costs relating to the manufactured homes.

Petitioners and 18 other related corporations are either subsidiaries of, or sister corporations to, Associated Dealers, Inc. (ADI), a Nevada corporation.

ADI and 12 of ADI's related corporations*52 also have filed petitions with the Court relating to the same expense versus inventory issue that is involved herein, 1 and respondent, ADI, and the other related petitioners have agreed to be bound by the final outcome of this issue in these two consolidated cases.

Hereinafter, we generally use the acronym ADI indiscriminately to refer to petitioners, to ADI, and to the ADI-related corporations.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.

At the time the petitions were filed, both petitioners' principal places of business were located in Reno, Nevada.

ADI and its related corporations buy and sell manufactured homes in the same manner.

Manufactured homes are constructed at a factory location and are then transported directly to homesites of retail purchasers.

ADI has been selling manufactured homes for more than 30 years, *53 and ADI has become the largest seller of manufactured homes in Arizona and one of the largest sellers of manufactured homes in the Southwestern United States. In recent years, ADI has expanded its sales of manufactured homes to 192 locations in 22 states.

From the 1970s through the late 1990s, ADI purchased completed manufactured homes from unrelated manufacturers and sold the manufactured homes directly to retail customers using individual salespersons who worked for ADI as employees.

In the late 1990s, however, as a result of a significant decline in business and excessive costs such as employee wages and commissions, a number of manufacturers of manufactured homes closed factories, and many sellers of manufactured homes went out of business.

To adjust to the changing market conditions and to reduce costs, in approximately 1999 ADI adopted a revised business plan and restructured its sales operation. Under ADI's revised business plan, ADI's salespersons are given a more active role in the sales activities and act as independent contractors vis-a-vis ADI. 2

*54 Under the agreements ADI enters into with the independent salespersons, ADI purchases from manufacturers a number of model manufactured homes and places the model manufactured homes on retail sales lots that ADI leases for the purpose of displaying the manufactured homes to the public and to potential retail customers.

The retail sales lots that ADI leases generally are located in prominent, high traffic areas -- either the same sales lots ADI had leased and used in prior years or new sales lots. These lots are not leased by ADI as storage lots, but rather the lots are leased by ADI as sales lots for the sale of manufactured homes.

ADI places the model manufactured homes on the sales lots to attract public attention, to provide an opportunity for interested retail customers to inspect the types of manufactured homes that are available for purchase, and in order that the independent salespersons have manufactured homes on the sales lots to show to customers.

On any one sales lot, ADI generally places on display six to seven model manufactured homes that ADI has purchased from manufacturers, each with different features and floor plan.

During their inspection of ADI model manufactured*55 homes, retail customers generally are accompanied by one of the independent salespersons who has contracted with ADI.

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

Related

City Line Candy & Tobacco Corp. v. Commissioner
141 T.C. No. 13 (U.S. Tax Court, 2013)
Load, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
559 F.3d 909 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)
Load v. Cir
Ninth Circuit, 2009

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2007 T.C. Memo. 51, 93 T.C.M. 969, 2007 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 51, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/load-inc-v-commr-tax-2007.