Surtronics, Inc. v. Commissioner

1985 T.C. Memo. 277, 50 T.C.M. 99, 1985 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 353
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedJune 11, 1985
DocketDocket No. 25389-82.
StatusUnpublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 1985 T.C. Memo. 277 (Surtronics, 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
Surtronics, Inc. v. Commissioner, 1985 T.C. Memo. 277, 50 T.C.M. 99, 1985 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 353 (tax 1985).

Opinion

SURTRONICS, INC., Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Surtronics, Inc. v. Commissioner
Docket No. 25389-82.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1985-277; 1985 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 353; 50 T.C.M. (CCH) 99; T.C.M. (RIA) 85277;
June 11, 1985.

*353 Petitioner electroplated switches and other component parts for manufacturers of electronic equipment, such as radios, televisions, and computers. Most of the electroplating was done with gold and silver, but occasionally non-precious metals were used. Accurate inventories of the metals used in the electroplating process were maintained, but for income tax purposes petitioner only used the inventories to determine the cost of goods sold. All other items of income and expense were reported on petitioner's books and on its tax returns on the cash basis. Respondent determined that petitioner's method of accounting did not clearly reflect income under sections 446 and 471 and recomputed petitioner's income using the accrual method of accounting.

Held, metals used by petitioner in the electroplating process were merchandise held for sale and petitioner is required to maintain inventories and to use the accrual method of accounting.

Held,further, petitioner has not demonstrated that there is substantial identity of results between its method of accounting and the method adopted by respondent, that its income as computed under its method is as accurate as standard methods*354 of accounting will permit, and that consequently its method does not clearly reflect its income.

W. Gerald Thornton,David D. Dahl, for the petitioner.
Eric B. Jorgensen, for the respondent.

SHIELDS

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

SHIELDS, Judge:*355 Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioner's Federal income taxes for the fiscal years 1979 and 1980 in the amounts of $166,706.95 and $38,081.19, respectively. The issue is whether petitioner's method of accounting clearly reflected its taxable income.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found, the stipulation of facts being incorporated herein by reference.

Petitioner, Surtronics, Inc., a North Carolina corporation, had its principal place of business in Raleigh at the time its petition was filed. Its income tax returns for the fiscal years ending on September 30, 1979 and September 30, 1980 were filed with the Internal Revenue Service Center at Memphis, Tennessee.

Petitioner was organized in 1976 by William H. Wade, Jr. and Terry P. Smith III, to continue a business which they had been operating since 1965 as a partnership. The business consisted of electroplating certain components such as switches for radios, televisions, computers and other electronic equipment for several firms. Most of the plating was done with gold or silver, but occasionally a non-precious metal such as zinc, cadmium, nickel or chrome was used.

*356 Petitioner's process consisted of (1) cleaning the object to be plated; (2) placing the object in a tank containing the plating metal in a chemical solution; (3) checking the object from time to time until the desired plating was obtained; and (4) rinsing, drying and repackaging the object for return to the customer. The thickness of the metal plating on the object would sometimes be as little as one ten-thousandth of an inch. Occasionally petitioner did a minimal amount of electropolishing where an object would simply be polished by placing it in a chemical solution without any metal plating.

During 1979 and 1980 petitioner's business increased substantially due to an increase in the number of customers locating in the area. Stackpole Components Company, one of petitioner's largest customers, was acquired during this period. Petitioner did approximately $1,500,000 worth of electroplating for Stackpole during each year. Because of its high volume of business and the need to provide reliable service to its customers by avoiding problems with its suppliers of metals, petitioner attempted to maintain a 30 to 60 day inventory of all metals used in its process. Such metals were classified*357 as tangible personal property by the North Carolina Revenue Department for sales and use tax purposes. Electroplating was classified as a manufacturing industry by the same department.

When gold or silver was used by petitioner in its electroplating process the cost of the metal represented approximately 75 percent of the price petitioner charged for the work. When non-precious metals were used, the cost of the metals represented only about five percent of the price charged by petitioner.

Petitioner determined the price to be charged per unit from the cost of the metal that was consumed in the process. The following example illustrates how the unit price for electroplating one object with a precious metal was determined:

Amount of Metal to be Used.134 oz.
(Determined from the area to be
plated and the desired thickness
of the plating.)

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1985 T.C. Memo. 277, 50 T.C.M. 99, 1985 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/surtronics-inc-v-commissioner-tax-1985.