*63 Decision will be entered under Rule 155.
Held, in order to satisfy the "all events" test of
*101 OPINION
Respondent determined a deficiency of $ 394,887 in petitioner's Federal income tax for the year ended October 31, 1972. After concessions by the parties, the issues for decision are (1) whether, as*65 an accrual method taxpayer, *102 petitioner must include in its gross income amounts representing claimed refunds of New York State franchise taxes and New York City general corporate taxes for the taxable year ended October 31, 1972, attributable to a net operating loss carryback from the taxable year ended October 31, 1975; and (2) whether, under sections 861 and 862, 1 the bad debt deduction which resulted from petitioner's payment on its guaranty of a loan to its wholly owned foreign subsidiary is allocable to foreign source income thereby reducing the maximum allowable foreign tax credit available to petitioner under section 904.
*66 This case was fully stipulated pursuant to
Petitioner's return for the taxable year ended October 31, 1975, reflected a net operating loss of $ 1,891,413. On or about January 23, 1976, petitioner filed Form 1139, seeking to carry back the net operating loss of the taxable year ended October 31, 1975, to the taxable year ended October 31, 1972, as well as to carry back an unused investment credit from 1975 to 1972. A refund of $ 918,786, plus statutory interest, subsequently was tentatively allowed.
On October 31, 1975, based on the carryback *67 of its net operating loss, petitioner was entitled to file claims for a refund of New York State franchise taxes and New York City general corporation taxes, for the taxable year ended October 31, 1972. New York State tax law and the regulations issued thereunder, as well as similar provisions applicable to the New *103 York City general corporation tax, provide limitations on the amount of a net operating loss which may be carried back. 3 According to the New York Tax Law article 27, section 1086, the New York State Tax Commission has the right to examine any refund claim before determining whether to allow such claim and the amount. A similar procedure exists with respect to the New York City general corporation tax. N.Y. City Admin. Code sec. R46-67.0.1. See also N.Y. City Admin. Code sec. R46-77.0.
Based upon the net operating loss carryback from 1975, 4 some time after October 31, 1975, petitioner*68 filed a claim for refund of New York State franchise taxes for the taxable year ended October 31, 1972, in the amount of $ 419,949 and a similar claim for refund of New York City taxes in the amount of $ 334,916. Consequently, petitioner received a check from New York State in an amount approximating that which had been claimed. No refund, however, had been received from New York City.
Respondent examined petitioner's Federal income tax returns for the taxable years ended October 31, 1972, and October 31, 1975, and adjustments to income were made totaling $ 331,319 for the taxable year ended October 31, 1972, and $ 5,916 for the taxable year ended October 31, 1975. Petitioner had claimed and respondent had allowed a deduction for the New York State franchise taxes and the New York*69 City general corporation taxes sought to be refunded for the taxable year ended October 31, 1972, on petitioner's Federal return filed for that year.
Petitioner filed its returns using the accrual method of accounting.
In or about April 1973, Snark Products GmbH (Snark), a wholly owned foreign subsidiary of the petitioner with offices in Germany, secured a loan from the Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. Petitioner was required to execute a guaranty of the loan to Snark exposing it to a maximum liability of 2 million *104 Deutsche marks. Negotiations incident to the securing of the loan and the guaranty occurred in New York, N.Y. The loan proceeds were to be used by Snark for its working capital and were to be delivered to Snark at a branch of the Chase Manhattan Bank in Germany. Snark did no business in the United States.
Snark defaulted on payment of the loan and petitioner was required to, and did, pay $ 854,761 to the Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., pursuant to the terms of the guaranty. The parties agree that petitioner is allowed a bad debt deduction in that amount in the taxable year ended October 31, 1975. 5
*70 Petitioner calculated the foreign tax credit under the per-country limitation method in the return for its taxable year ended October 31, 1972. Its gross income from West German sources for the taxable year ended October 31, 1975, was $ 587,791; the amount of its total gross income for that year being dependent upon a resolution of the first issue herein is either $ 37,118,682 (petitioner's figure) or an amount reflecting the inclusion of $ 419,273 and $ 334,937 in State and local tax refunds (respondent's position).
Firstly, petitioner argues that because its New York State and City refunds could have been disallowed in whole or in part as a result of an examination by the New York State Tax Commission, the New York City Department of Finance, or the Internal Revenue Service, all events fixing the right to such refunds had not occurred at October 31, 1975, and because, similarly, the amount thereof could not be determined with reasonable accuracy, petitioner, an accrual method taxpayer, should not include such potential tax refunds in its income for that year. Secondly, petitioner contends that the bad debt it suffered on its guaranty of the loan to Snark is allocable to U.S. sources*71 because negotiations incident to the securing of the loan and the guaranty occurred in New York, N.Y., and, like gains from the sale of personal property which are derived entirely within the country in which the property is sold, losses from bad debts should be treated as allocated specifically to the country where transactions effecting the loss occurred. Alternatively, petitioner asserts that this bad *105 debt deduction should be apportioned on the basis of the ratio of gross income from West German sources to total gross income.
Respondent, by contrast, maintains, pursuant to
Respondent's position, as stated in
On the other hand, respondent's position in
*106 We need not dwell upon the seeming inconsistency between these two rulings because in the final analysis neither of them is binding upon us. See
The New York State Tax Commission has the right to examine any refund claim before*75 deciding whether to allow the claim. N.Y. Tax Law art. 27, sec. 1086 8 (McKinney 1975). Moreover, both the New York State and City taxes at issue here are determined, substantially, although not entirely, by reference to taxable income for Federal income tax purposes. N.Y. Tax Law art. 9-A, sec. 208, subdiv. 9 (McKinney Supp. 1981). See
*76 While we see nothing inconsistent with applying a standard of including income in an accrual-method taxpayer's gross income if only additional mechanical acts by third parties need to be completed, we find it arbitrary for respondent to assert *107 that it is "reasonable to expect" the particular taxing authority's certification in the instance of New York State and City taxation, which is to a large degree dependent on decisions of Federal taxing authorities, when respondent concludes contrariwise in respect to Federal taxing authorities.
In Masonite Corp. v. Fly, an unreported case (
Therefore, under
The second issue to be determined herein is whether a bad debt deduction resulting from petitioner's guaranty of a loan to Snark is allocable to foreign source income for the purposes of determining the maximum allowable foreign tax credit.
Section 904(a) limits the amount of foreign taxes paid or accrued by a taxpayer which may be credited against U.S. tax. Section 904(a)(1) provided as follows:
SEC. 904(a). Alternative Limitations. --
(1) Per-country limitation. -- In the case of any taxpayer who does not elect the limitation provided by paragraph (2), the amount of the credit in respect of the tax paid or accrued to any foreign country or possession of the United*78 States shall not exceed the same proportion of the tax against which such credit is taken which the taxpayer's taxable income from sources within such country or possession (but not in excess of the taxpayer's entire taxable income) bears to his entire taxable income for the same taxable year.
Sections 861 and 862, and the regulations thereunder, define "taxable income from sources within such country."*108 Section 861 provides, in part:
SEC. 861(a). Gross Income From Sources Within United States. -- The following items of gross income shall be treated as income from sources within the United States * * *
* * * *
(6) Sale or exchange of personal property. -- Gains, profits and income derived from the purchase of personal property without the United States * * * and its sale or exchange within the United States.
(b) Taxable Income From Sources Within United States. -- From the items of gross income specified in subsection (a) as being income from sources within the United States there shall be deducted the expenses, losses and other deductions properly apportioned or allocated thereto and a ratable part of any expenses, losses or other deductions which cannot definitely*79 be allocated to some item or class of gross income. The remainder, if any, shall be included in full as taxable income from sources within the United States.
We agree with respondent that, in applying
In
*109 We find that
Decision will be entered under Rule 155.
Footnotes
1. All statutory references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 as amended and in effect for the years in issue, unless otherwise stated.
The parties agree that, in the event we determine that the portion of the net operating loss carryback to the taxable year ended Oct. 31, 1972, attributable to the bad debt deduction should be allocated to the petitioner's foreign source income from Germany, respondent's computation of the amount of the foreign tax credit reduction is correct.↩
2. Unless otherwise indicated, any reference to Rules shall be deemed to refer to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.↩
3. See N.Y. Tax Law art. 9A, sec. 208(f) (McKinney Supp. 1981); N.Y. City Admin. Code sec. R46-2.0, subdiv. 8(f).↩
4. The parties agree petitioner is entitled to a net operating loss carryback from the taxable year ended Oct. 31, 1975, to the taxable year ended Oct. 31, 1972, of at least $ 1,131,287 as set forth in the statutory notice of deficiency.↩
5. A portion of petitioner's net operating loss in the taxable year ended Oct. 31, 1975, resulted from this bad debt deduction.↩
6. The ruling states as exceptions to this precept (1) where a refund is made because of a settlement between the parties and (2) where a case is being litigated.↩
7. We note that no such assumption is made in
Rev. Rul. 62-160, 2 C.B. 139">1962-2 C.B. 139 , with respect to the foundation of a taxpayer's claim for refund so that it would appear that there is no real inconsistency between that ruling andRev. Rul. 65-190 , supra,1965-2 C.B. 150↩ .8. A similar procedure exists for the New York City general corporation tax. N.Y. City Admin. Code sec. R46-67.0.1. See also N.Y. City Admin. Code sec. R46-77.0.↩