Loomis v. Commissioner

1997 T.C. Memo. 381, 74 T.C.M. 360, 1997 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 458
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedAugust 20, 1997
DocketDocket No. 8748-95
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1997 T.C. Memo. 381 (Loomis 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
Loomis v. Commissioner, 1997 T.C. Memo. 381, 74 T.C.M. 360, 1997 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 458 (tax 1997).

Opinion

WILLIAM G. AND VIVIAN LOOMIS, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Loomis v. Commissioner
Docket No. 8748-95
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1997-381; 1997 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 458; 74 T.C.M. (CCH) 360;
August 20, 1997, Decided

*458 Decision will be entered for petitioners.

Gary C. Randall and James J. Workland, for petitioners.
John M. Altman and David A. Winsten, for respondent.
FAY, Judge

JUDGE

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

FAY, Judge: *459 Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioners' Federal income tax for the taxable year 1991 in the amount of $ 35,528. After concessions, the sole issue for decision is whether petitioners must include the fair market value of grain contracts in their alternative minimum taxable income (AMTI) for 1991.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some *460 of the facts have been stipulated, and the stipulation of facts and attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference.

Petitioners resided in Lind, Washington, at the time of the filing of their petition. Petitioners timely filed their joint 1991 Federal income tax return with the Internal Revenue Service Center at Ogden, Utah. Petitioners reported their income using the cash method of accounting.

During 1991, petitioners engaged in the business of farming. Specifically, they grew and sold grain. They have been in the business of farming for over 25 years. In October and November 1991, petitioners entered into deferred payment contracts (the contracts) with the Union Elevator Warehouse Co. (Union Elevator). Pursuant to the contracts, title to the grain passed to Union Elevator at the time of sale. However, petitioners contracted for payment to occur the following year. One of the contracts with Union Elevator, which is representative of all the contracts at issue, provides:

The Seller agrees to sell and Buyer agrees to buy from Seller the following commodities and both agree to abide by the terms and conditions listed below:

Quantity:2,000 BU.
Commodity:Soft white wheat
Price:4.00
Price basis:FOB whse
Title passes on:11-22-91
Payment date:Jan 1992

*461 The contracts do not provide for interest. Nevertheless, Union Elevator paid petitioners interest at a rate of 5 percent per annum. The following table contains the material terms of the contracts in question: 1

NumberNet PaymentInterestTotal
5554A$ 38,618.65$ 449.67$ 39,068.32
5644A854.307.37861.67
5654A2,210.5018.772,229.27
5658A6,636.6156.376,692.98
5658A12,534.33106.4612,640.79
5682A11,790.7592.0611,882.81
5785A7,880.4042.107,922.50
5793A37,925.87187.0338,112.90
5793A17,869.4788.1217,957.59
5798A19,800.5094.9319,895.43
Total156,121.381,142.88157,264.26

The wheat that petitioners sold pursuant to the contracts was sold at the prevailing market price for wheat as of the date of each contract.

*462 Union Elevator used grain settlement statements in determining the amount to be paid to petitioners. The amount to be paid consisted of the gross price agreed upon for the wheat, less any grade discount or premiums, storage charges, and Washington State Wheat Commission tax.

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

Related

Helvering v. Cement Investors, Inc.
316 U.S. 527 (Supreme Court, 1942)
Estate of Silverman v. Commissioner
98 T.C. No. 6 (U.S. Tax Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1997 T.C. Memo. 381, 74 T.C.M. 360, 1997 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loomis-v-commissioner-tax-1997.