IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-20299
CHEVRON USA, INC.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Texas
(CA-H-93-0660)
February 21, 1996
Before GARWOOD, EMILIO M. GARZA and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.*
PER CURIAM:
We affirm, essentially for the reasons given in the district
court’s well-considered opinion. We further note that although
taxpayer and its parent filed consolidated income tax returns,
there is no provision for consolidated Windfall Profits Tax
returns, and taxpayer admits that the logic of its theory of the
case would apply with equal force if it and its parent did not file
consolidated income tax returns. Landreth v. United States, 963
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the Court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.
F.2d 84 (5th Cir. 1992), cannot bear the weight taxpayer would
place on it. Although it is a Windfall Profits Tax case, it is
relevant at most by a somewhat removed analogy. Neither Dresser
Industries, Inc. v. Commissioner, 911 F.2d 1128 (5th Cir. 1990),
nor General Portland Cement Co. v. United States, 628 F.2d 321 (5th
Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 983 (1981), both income tax
cases, stretch the principles of cost accounting across separate
corporate entities so as to allow one to treat as its expense an
item incurred and paid by the other.
The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
2