§13

485, 493 (2017), supplementing and overruling in part 147 T.C.

That revenue procedure was superseded by Rev.

In short, section 274(n)(2) will allow petitioners to deduct the entire cost of their employee meals if the meals are a de minimis fringe benefit under section 132(e). Thus, petitioners may deduct the meals’ full cost if they reasonably determine that the meals are excludable from their employees’ incomes under section 119. Sec. 1.132-7(a)(2), Income Tax Regs.12 To the extent that respondent believes that the de minimis fringe benefit exception is inapplicable because the meals were furnished fr

We disagree with respondent's contention that "The transfer of the drugs is clearly a commercial transaction" to the extent he implies a commercial transaction is the conveyance of merchandise.

Financial results Facebook’s actual revenue, as reported in its Forms 10–K, Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, for subsequent years, was $3.711 billion for 2011, $5.089 billion for 2012, and $7.872 billion for 2013.

In a Form 8–K, Current Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that AbbVie filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, it explained that the proposed Treasury regulations “introduced an unacceptable level of uncertainty to the transaction.” Ex.

According to Form 10–K (the Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934) for the year 8 The partnership also wrote off in November 2009 interest that had accrued as of December 31, 2008, on another iVoice debenture.

Petitioner’s Form 10–K Financial Statements Petitioner filed Form 10–K, Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, with the Securities and Exchange Commission for 2009, 2010, and 2011 that included consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP.

Thus, petitioner contends that the Court should avoid applying section 13 [*13] 404(a)(5) and avoid this asymmetry by adopting the definition of liability already applied in Tufts v.

Pursuant to section 1366, IDG's ordinary loss flowed through to Mr.

- 15 - As a publicly held corporation, MoneyGram filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Forms 10-K, Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

- 15 - As a publicly held corporation, MoneyGram filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Forms 10-K, Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

On its Form 10-K, Annual Report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Mylan stated that it "sold" its rights to nebivolol.

On its Form 10-K, Annual Report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Mylan stated that it "sold" its rights to nebivolol.

On January 13, 1998, petitioners filed their Form 10-K, Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(D) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, for TYE 1997 (1997 Form 10-K).

Petitioner, in response to respondent's determination with respect to the 11- year vesting schedule, simply explains: "[t]he Plan provides for 2 to 6 years vesting per Code section 411(a)(2)(B)(iii)." Respondent counters that, in spite of petitioner's statement, the plan in section 13 provides for an 11-year minimum vesting schedule.

Times Mirror’s Financial Reporting Following the Close of the Bender Transaction On August 13, 1998, Unterman signed Times Mirror’s Form 10-Q, Quarterly Report Pursuant To Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, for the company’s quarterly period ended June 30, 1998 (August 13, 1998, Form 10-Q).

In addition, in connection with MedChem[ P.R.]’s efforts to establish the MedChem [P.R.] Plant pursuant to Section 13, Alcon [P.R.] agrees, upon reasonable notice to use good faith efforts to process such reasonable amounts in excess of 250% of the Current Annual Forecast Amount during the - 63 - ninety (90) day period prior to the effective termination of this Agreement so that MedChem [P.R.] may maintain suffic

United States, 135 Fed. Cl. 36, 38 (2017). Title 28 U.S.C. § 1346 outlines when the district courts and the Court of Federal Claims have jurisdiction over a claim against the United States, including tax refund suits, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(1), and TEFRA partnership-level proceedings, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(e). In turn, 28 U.S.C. § 2402 limits the availability of jury trials in actions brought under 28 U.S.C. § 1346: “[A]ny action against the United States under section 1346 shall be tried by the court w

t to sell his or her percentage interest in any item of the * * * [leased artwork] during the Initial Term or any Additional Term without the joinder of * * * [the parties to the art lease] for the purpose of selling the item * * * in its entirety.” Section 13 states that the lease and the parties’ “rights, duties and obligations” under it “may not be transferred or assigned” without the consent of all parties and that, subject to that restriction on assignment, the lease “shall be binding upon

13c), the majority concludes that those drugs were not purchased for resale (which, I assume, leads to the conclusion that doctors, like the hospitals, are not merchants). The majority mischaracterizes a provision of the Nonprofit Institutions Act, 15 U.S.C. sec. 13c (1994). That provision provides as follows: “Nothing in the * * * Robinson-Pa

As a publicly held corporation, MoneyGram files with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Forms 10-K, Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

On January 13, 1998, petitioners filed their Form 10-K, Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(D) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, for TYE 1997 (1997 Form 10-K).

Solv-Ex’s SEC Problems Because of the joint bankruptcies and its inability to obtain audited financial statements, Solv-Ex failed to file a Form 10-K, Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, with the SEC for the year ended June 30, 1997,8 as required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Times Mirror’s Financial Reporting Following the Close of the Bender Transaction On August 13, 1998, Unterman signed Times Mirror’s Form 10-Q, Quarterly Report Pursuant To Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, for the company’s quarterly period ended June 30, 1998 (August 13, 1998, Form 10-Q).

ns: - 15 - Noncompete Secrecy Total Taxable Year Agreement Agreement Deductions 1990 $100,000 $50,000 $150,000 1991 400,000 200,000 600,000 1992 400,000 200,000 600,000 1993 400,000 200,000 600,000 1994 400,000 200,000 600,000 1995 300,000 150,000 450,000 TOTAL 2,000,000 1,000,000 3,000,000 On June 29, 1990, Scherer filed a Form 10-K, pursuant to section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), for the 1990 taxable year.

13-4-40 (Michie 1982). Unlike Christoph v. United States, 931 F. Supp. 1564 (S.D. Ga. 1996), payments of all the litigation costs here at issue were made by the company and charged as compensation to Mr. Thompson. Based on the record before us, we hold that petitioner has failed to carry her burden of showing that she paid or incurred, -17- w

Similar to the Draft Framework Agreement, the HoT Agreement did not define “facilities.” Instead, under the heading “Facilities and Equipment,” section 13 of the HoT Agreement defined only “Equipment” as “premises, tools, fixtures, jigs and equipment .

Section 13 of the CSA provided as follows: [BV LLC] shall promptly pay to INFOTELECOM all inter or intrastate access charges, reciprocal compensation, and/or any other charges, surcharges and/or taxes billed to INFOTELECOM by a third party, or remitted by INFOTELECOM to a third party, that are associated with any of [BV LLC’s] traffic delivered or

They argue that petitioner should be considered an employee paid on a “fee basis” within the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), see 29 C.F.R.

roportion to their respective Percentage Interests.” Section 4, titled “Distributions,” generally provided that the general partner had absolute discretion to distribute cash “to the Partners in proportion to their respective Percentage Interests.” Section 13, titled “Dissolution and Winding Up,” provided that the partnership would dissolve and wind up upon (among other things) “[t]he affirmative vote of all the Partners.” Section 13 also provided that in the event the partnership was wound up,

Under section 13 Because the motorhome was not used for business purposes, Mr. Ottuso does not qualify for any capital loss deduction. See I.R.C. § 165(c). 11 [*11] 274(d) taxpayers must meet strict substantiation requirements to deduct certain expenses under section 162, including expenses for the use of “listed property” as defined in section 280F(d)(

Section 170(f)(11)(A)(ii)(II) provides that a charitable contri- bution deduction will not be disallowed “if it is shown that the failure to [secure a qualified appraisal] is due to reasonable cause and not to will- ful neglect.” See Belair Woods, LLC v.

Article 6.2 of the NPA, LLC operating agreement provides that “[e]ach Member has made an initial Capital Contribution to the Company in such amounts and under such terms as were agreed by the Member and approved by the Company as a condition to the issuance of Units to the Member.

imited administrators assert, and respondent agrees, that the inclusion of the $6,572,310 agreed-upon undistributed income amount in decedent’s gross estate will result in an equivalent increased charitable contribution deduction to the estate under section 13 Respondent represents, and the limited administrators have not disputed, that the $6,572,310 undistributed income amount was not included in the stipulated value of the KFLP partnership interest.

Section 13.2 of the easement deed provides: “Grantor and Grantee agree that Grantor shall not undertake, and Grantee shall not permit, any change to the exterior of the Building which would be inconsistent with the historical character of such exterior.” Section 1 of each subordination agreement provides as follows: Terms of Subordination. In the e

The section 6707A penalty is proposed for your failure to disclose a reportable transaction as required by IRC section 6011 and associated regulations and/or for failing to disclose in a periodic report required under section 13 or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 any penalty described in IRC section 6707A(e)(2) that you were required to pay.

13(a), 123 Stat. at 2992, amended sec. 172(b)(1)(H)(i) to permit a taxpayerto elect to carry back a net operating loss for the 2009 tax year to three, four, or five years instead ofthe usual two years. The election under this section is required to be made in a manner prescribed by the Secretary, and must be made by the due date (including ext

Colorado law treats payments made to satisfy future spousal support obligations differently from payments made to satisfy spousal support arrears. - 7 - [*7] Future spousal support obligations terminate at the death ofeither spouse unless otherwise agreed in writing or expressly provided in the decree. Il sec. 14- 10-122(2)(a)(I);

13-80-104(1)(a) (2013). The California statute defines "substantial completion" to mean the first occurrence of: "(1) The date offinal inspection by the applicable public agency. (2) The date ofrecordation ofa valid notice ofcompletion. (3) The date ofuse or occupation ofthe improvement. (4) One year after termination or cessation of work on t

13-80-104(1)(a) (2013). The California statute defines "substantial completion" to mean the first occurrence of: "(1) The date offinal inspection by the applicable public agency. (2) The date ofrecordation ofa valid notice ofcompletion. (3) The date ofuse or occupation ofthe improvement. (4) One year after termination or cessation of work on t

13-80-104(1)(a) (2013). The California statute defines "substantial completion" to mean the first occurrence of: "(1) The date offinal inspection by the applicable public agency. (2) The date ofrecordation ofa valid notice ofcompletion. (3) The date ofuse or occupation ofthe improvement. (4) One year after termination or cessation of work on t

According to petitioner's 2005 SEC Form 10-K, Annual ReportPursuantto Section 13 or 15(d) ofthe Securities andEx- change Act of 1934, the T&C category expenses "consistprincipally ofpayroll and related expenses for employees involved in research and development, in- cluding application development, editorial content, merchandising selection, systems and telecommunications support, and costs associatedwith the systems

13-80-104(l)(a) (2013). The California statute defines “substantial completion” to mean the first occurrence of: “(1) The date of final inspection by the applicable public agency. (2) The date of recordation of a valid notice of completion. (3) The date of use or occupation of the improvement. (4) One year after termination or cessation of wor

13.001(b) (West 2004). Each LLC was, thus, a cotenant (i.e., coowner) with Energytec (and others) ofthe respective leasehold. See Glover v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 187 S.W.3d 201, 213 (Tex. App. 2006) ("Owners of undivided portions ofoil and gas interests are tenants in common.").6 6Respondent also agues that, because the assignments were not exe

13:19-6 (West 2003) (for a development in coastal areas); Dowel Assocs. v. Harmony Twp. Land Use Bd., 956 A.2d 349, 353-354 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2008); In re Application ofState ofNew Jersey, 2007 WL 1574403 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2007); Taft v. Upper Freehold Twp. Planning Bd., 2007 WL 1261121 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2007). Our s

13.001(b) (West 2004). "Without evidence to the contrary, the law presumes a grantor delivers a deed on the date ofexecution and acknowledgment." Burgess v. Easley, 893 S.W.2d. 87, 90 (Tex. App. 1994). Respondent contends that,petitioner has failed to establish that she conveyed legal title ofthe Libertyproperties to HOME during 2006. Responde

Furthermore, under section 13 ofthe 2003 settlement agreement, Boone, Mr.

not to sell his or her percentage interest in any item ofthe * * * [leased artwork] during the Initial Term or any Additional Term without the joinder of * * * [the parties to the art lease] for the purpose ofselling the item * * * in its entirety." Section 13 states that the lease and the parties' "rights, duties and.obligations" under it "may not be transferred or assigned" without the consent ofall parties and that, subject to that restriction on assignment, the lease "shall be binding upon a

13:19-6 (West 2003) (for a development in coastal areas); Dowel Assocs. v. Harmony Twp. Land Use Bd., 956 A.2d 349, 353-354 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2008); In re Application ofState ofNew Jersey, 2007 WL 1574403 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2007); Taft v. Upper Freehold Twp. Planning Bd., 2007 WL 1261121 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2007). Our s

13:19-6 (West 2003) (for a development in coastal areas); Dowel Assocs. v. Harmony Twp. Land Use Bd., 956 A.2d 349, 353-354 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2008); In re Application ofState ofNew Jersey, 2007 WL 1574403 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2007); Taft v. Upper Freehold Twp. Planning Bd., 2007 WL 1261121 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2007). Our s

13.001(b) (West 2004). Each LLC was, thus, a cotenant (i.e., coowner) with Energytec (and others) ofthe respective leasehold. See Glover v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 187 S.W.3d 201, 213 (Tex. App. 2006) ("Owners of undivided portions ofoil and gas interests are tenants in common.").6 6Respondent also agues that, because the assignments were not exe

13 (currently codified at Alaska Stat. Ann. sec. 25.24.152(a) (West 2010)). And Colorado as well, since at least 1992. See 1992 Colo. Legis. Serv. H.B. 92-130, sec. 1 (West) (currently codified at Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. sec. 14-10-115(12) (LexisNexis 2012)). These states are by no means outliers.5 In states that have 4(...continued) indicates t

13 (currently codified at Alaska Stat. Ann. sec. 25.24.152(a) (West 2010)). And Colorado as well, since at least 1992. See 1992 Colo. Legis. Serv. H.B. 92-130, sec. 1 (West) (currently codified at Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. sec. 14-10-115(12) (LexisNexis 2012)). These states are by no means outliers. In states that have such a requirement, the majo

13:8A-1 (West 1961), the New Jersey Green Acres Land Acquisition Act of 1971, N.J. Stat. Ann. sec. 13:8A-19 (West 1971), the New Jersey Green Acres Land Acquisition and Recreation Opportunities Act, N.J. Stat. Ann. sec. 13:8A-35 (West 1975), and the Garden State Preservation Trust Act, N.J. Stat. Ann. sec. 13:8C-1 (West 1999). We refer to thes

13.001(b) (West 2004)). - Be that as it may, petitioner's entitlement to a charitable contribution deduction for the Cleveland property faces other obstacles. - 11 - First, we are concerned with petitioner's failure to produce copies of the original deeds. She is, and was at all times relevant, an executive officer of HOME and no doubt had ac

ng . See Cohan v . Commissioner, supra at 544 . We may not use the Cohan doctrine, however, to estimate expenses covered. by section 274(d) . See Sanford v . Commissioner, 50 T .C. 823, 82 7 (1968), affd . per curiam 412 F .2d 201 (2d Cir . 1969) ; sec. 13 Petitioner does not claim or show that sec . 7491(a) applies . Accordingly, she bears the burden of proof . See Rule ;142 (a) . - - .. 15 1 .274-5T(a), Temporary Income Tax Regs ., 50 Fed . Reg.-46014 (Nov . .6, 1985 ) Generally, we find petit

Petitioner argued that section 13 Petitioner claimed the $889.52 item as “Returns and Allowances” on Schedule C for the trade or business activity “Frexie”.

lowed Newport to buy the IRC stock, which likely would occur if the development of the technology proved to be successful. The Court also noted that all of the Schedules 10-K filed by Newport with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to sec. 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, described the research agreement, as entered into with IRC, as being more in the nature of an investment than a licensing of the technology. The Court further noted that, even if IRC

Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1989-568, involved deficiencies determined against various investors in several Hoyt partnerships. This Court found in favor of the investors on several issues, stating that “the transaction in issue should be respected for Federal income tax purposes.” Taxpayers in many Hoyt-related cases have used Bales a

Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1989-568, involved deficiencies determined against various investors in several Hoyt partnerships. This Court found in favor of the investors on several issues, stating that “the transaction in issue should be respected for Federal income tax purposes.” Taxpayers in many Hoyt-related cases have used Bales a

lowed Newport to buy the IRC stock, which likely would occur if the development of the technology proved to be successful. The Court also noted that all of the Schedules 10-K filed by Newport with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to sec. 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, described the research agreement, as entered into with IRC, as being more in the nature of an investment than a licensing of the technology. The Court further noted that, even if IRC

lowed Newport to buy the IRC stock, which likely would occur if the development of the technology proved to be successful. The Court also noted that all of the Schedules 10-K filed by Newport with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to sec. 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, described the research agreement, as entered into with IRC, as being more in the nature of an investment than a licensing of the technology. The Court further noted that, even if IRC

lowed Newport to buy the IRC stock, which likely would occur if the development of the technology proved to be successful. The Court also noted that all of the Schedules 10-K filed by Newport with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to sec. 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, described the research agreement, as entered into with IRC, as being more in the nature of an investment than a licensing of the technology. The Court further noted that, even if IRC

lowed Newport to buy the IRC stock, which likely would occur if the development of the technology proved to be successful. The Court also noted that all of the Schedules 10-K filed by Newport with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to sec. 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, described the research agreement, as entered into with IRC, as being more in the nature of an investment than a licensing of the technology. The Court further noted that, even if IRC

death of the second grantor to die, after payment of expenses, the remaining assets in the trust shall be divided into two equal shares. The first share shall be distributed to the Charles Barry McKewen Trust, subject to the terms and condition of sec. 13 of the trust agreement. The second share shall be distributed to the Stefanie Margo Patterson Bell Trust, subject to the terms and conditions of sec. 14 of the trust agreement. - 9 - provides: Age Requirement or Disability. If any person has n

13-2-2(4) (2001); Sachs v. Jones, 63 S.E.2d 685 (Ga. Ct. App. 1951). The agreement’s preamble contemplated additional shareholders and provided that one of the purposes of the agreement was to ensure that such shareholders “benefit from and be bound by” the agreement. Construing the 1981 Agreement to allow lifetime transfers without the consen

not in the year of actual receipt by him.4 See Anastasio v. Commissioner, 67 T.C. 814, 3 If a minor dies before attaining the requisite age, the custodial property transfers to the minor’s estate upon the minor’s death. Md. Code Ann., Est. & Trusts sec. 13-320(3) (LEXIS through 2003 Sess.). 4 A minor who has attained the age of 14 years may seek a court order for delivery and payment of so much of the custodial property for the minor’s use and benefit. Md. Code Ann., Est. & (continued...) - 5 -

Powers & Trusts Law (EPTL) section 13-1.3 (McKinney 2003) for support.

Taxpayer Bill of Rights, Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988, Pub. L. 100-647, sec. 6230(a), 102 Stat. 3733, which was signed into law on Nov. 10, 1988, and became effective Jan. 1, 1989. 6 Administration, Internal Revenue Manual (CCH), sec. 13.1.1.1.1, at 40903 (2000). - 12 - action under certain delineated circumstances. The orders described in section 7811 and the regulations are remedial in nature and specifically do not cover the Commissioner’s determinations with respect to th

ircuit, considered the question before the Court today, and arrived at contrary results. The majority opinion now offers another rationale for its result. Rev. Proc. 87-56 only requires that assets be “used” by natural gas producers to qualify under section 13.2. In the instant litigation, respondent asserts that assets must be both “used” and “owned” by natural gas producers. Revenue procedures are promulgated to provide clear and precise guidance to taxpayers, and I would hold respondent to th

explanation of the relationship, if any, of the enumerated items to the provisions of decedent’s will. 4 It is by no means certain that this argument would prevail. See discussions by the following well-known commentators: 4 Casner, Estate Planning, sec. 13.5.2, at 87 (5th ed. 1988); Manning et al., Manning on Estate Planning, sec. 2.7, at 2-31 (5th ed. 2001); Covey, The Marital Deduction and the Use of Formula Provisions, 95 (2d ed. 1978). - 21 - Accordingly, we have no means by which to ascert

Securities and Exchange Commission Form 8-K, Current Report Under Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, dated July 24, 1985 (the Form 8-K), reports various purchases by husband of shares in A.T.

13(a) (1994), which prohibits discriminatory pricing in the sale of goods, a construction contract for the provision of labor and materials including 2 million bricks was not a contract for the sale of personal property. See General Shale Prods. Corp. v. Struck Constr. Co., 132 F.2d 425, 428 (6th Cir. 1942). It is clear from the case law that

Just compensation had also been further defined, at both the Federal and State levels, as fair market value, what a willing - 11 - buyer would pay a willing seller, at the time of the taking. See Kirby Forest Indus., Inc. v. United States, 467 U.S. 1, 10 (1984); Rapid City v. Baron, 227 N.W.2d 617, 620 (S.D. 1975). Against this backdrop,

COMPANY’S obligation under this Section 13 shall extend to the earlier of such time as the information protected hereby is in the public domain through no fault of COMPANY or ten (10) years following termination or expiration of this Agreement.

419A(b) provides that no addition to any qualified asset account may be taken into account for purposes of sec.

Section 13.2 of the partnership agreement provides that: No General Partner shall have the right to withdraw from the Partnership without the consent of the Limited Partners. On his timely filed Federal Gift Tax return for 1994, decedent reported a gift of a 0.4-percent general partnership interest and a 24-percent Class B limited partnership inter

13:4203 (West 1999); Lewis v. Macke Bldg. Serv., Inc., 524 So.2d 16 (La. Ct. App. 1988); Davis v. Le Blanc, 149 So.2d 252 (La. Ct. App. 1963). Respondent asserts that $143,407 of the total $320,880 petitioner received in connection with her personal injuries ($17,930 from the Doctor's Insurance and $125,477 from the State's Insurance) constitu

COMPANY’S obligation under this Section 13 shall extend to the earlier of such time as the information protected hereby is in the public domain through no fault of COMPANY or ten (10) years following termination or expiration of this Agreement.

States (and the few exceptions for domestic investments) to be invested in money - 31 - or property “ordinary and necessary for the active conduct of a qualified trade or business” (the active conduct restriction). H.R. 10650, 87th Cong., 2d Sess., sec. 13(a) (1962). The Senate eliminated that restriction. It retained virtually unchanged, however, the language of the House bill describing the few permitted domestic investments. Since the House undoubtedly understood that language to describe inv

UPSINCO was registered as an exempted company pursuant to the provisions of section 13 of the Companies Act of 1970, under the laws of Bermuda.

n the taxpayer's original return for the taxable year or an amended return filed timely. See sec. 179(c)(1)(B); sec. 1.179-5(a), Income Tax Regs. Once made, this election may not be revoked "except with the consent of the Secretary." Sec. 179(c)(2); sec. 13 In the notice of deficiency, respondent allowed petitioner a $211 expense deduction under sec. 179 in connection with Special O for 1993. The record does not reflect the specific property for which this deduction was allowed, nor does the rec

United States (and the few exceptions for domestic investments) to be invested in money or property “ordinary and necessary for the active conduct of a qualified trade or business” (the active conduct restriction). H.R. 10650, 87th Cong., 2d Sess., sec. 13(a) (1962). The Senate eliminated that restriction. It retained virtually unchanged, however, the language of the House bill describing the few permitted domestic investments. Since the House undoubtedly understood that language to describe in

(1) Except as pro- vided in section 13-21-101, C.R.S., when there is no agreement as to the rate thereof, creditors shall re- ceive interest as follows: (a) When money or property has been wrongfully withheld, interest shall be an amount which fully re- cognizes the gain or benefit realized by the person withholding such money or property from the date of wrongful withholding

In the event that an employee is not provided with a meal period, as provided in Section 13.01, he shall be paid at the rate of double (2X) the regular, straight-time hourly rate for the meal period omitted, and if a meal period is not provided after six (6) consecutive hours of work, the employee involved shall be paid at the rate of time and one-half (1 1/2X) his appropriate rate of pay for all work performed after six (6) co

gs”, and so we do not. See People of God Community v. Commissioner, 75 T.C. 127, 132 n.5 (1980); Alive Fellowship of Harmonious Living v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1984- 87 n.21; see also discussion in B. Hopkins, The Law of Tax-Exempt Organizations, sec. 13.4 (6th ed. 1992). - 99 - is a question of fact. Founding Church of Scientology v. United States, 188 Ct. Cl. 490, 412 F.2d 1197, 1200 (1969). Factors similar to those considered in determining reasonable compensation under section 162(a)(1) a

13-3-1 (1982); Associated Muts. v. Pope Lumber Co., 37 S.E.2d 393, 396 (Ga. 1946). Until each party has assented to all the terms, there is no binding contract. Ga. Ann. Code sec. 13-3-2 (1982). The essence of mutual assent is the meeting of the minds of the parties. Taylor Lumber Co. v. Clark Lumber Co., 127 S.E. 905, 906 (Ga. Ct. App. 1925).

13(c)(4) (West 1987 & Supp. 1990). A license may be suspended or revoked for failure to comply with the Act. Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 179d, sec. 16(b) & (e) (West Supp. 1990). The term "charitable purposes" is defined in the Act as one or more causes, deeds, or activities that (1) benefit the needy of Texas by, among other things, promot

13(c)(4) (West 1987 & Supp. 1990). A license may be suspended or revoked for failure to comply with the Act. Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 179d, sec. 16(b) & (e) (West Supp. 1990). The term "charitable purposes" is defined in the Act as one or more causes, deeds, or activities that (1) benefit the needy of Texas by, among other things, promot

13(c) (1994)), which exempts from the application of the Robinson-Patman Act "purchases of their supplies for their own use by * * * hospitals and charitable institutions not operated for profit." Accordingly, the issue in the Abbott Labs. case was whether the pharmaceutical products were sold to the hospitals for resale or for the hospitals'

Petitioners incurred these expenses to comply with section 13(a)(2) of the 1934 Act, 15 U.S.C.

Petitioners incurred these expenses to comply with section 13(a)(2) of the 1934 Act, 15 U.S.C.

Commerce, 35 Cal. Rptr. 2d 64, 70 (Ct. App. 1994). - 8 - because a mere contract to convey property is not a trust. Reagh v. Kelley, 89 Cal. Rptr. 425, 532 (Ct. App. 1970); Huebener v. Chinn, 207 P.2d 1136, 1143 (Or. 1949); Restatement, Trusts 2d, sec. 13 (1959). But we do not think that this case can be disposed of by such a separation of the two phases of the transactions involved herein. The two phases, which occurred on the same day,5 are inextricably intertwined and indeed the overall thru

ction 864(c)(4)(B) and the regulations thereunder. The phrase "office or other fixed place of business in the United States" also appears in section 864(b)(2)(C). Although the regulation does not expressly provide that it is to apply for purposes of section 13 Sec. 1.864-2(c)(2)(i), Income Tax Regs., defines a security for purposes of par. (c) of sec. 1.864-2, Income Tax Regs., as: "any note, bond, debenture, or other evidence of indebtedness, or any evidence of an interest in or right to subscr

Petitioners incurred these expenses to comply with section 13(a)(2) of the 1934 Act, 15 U.S.C.

ction 864(c)(4)(B) and the regulations thereunder. The phrase "office or other fixed place of business in the United States" also appears in section 864(b)(2)(C). Although the regulation does not expressly provide that it is to apply for purposes of section 13 Sec. 1.864-2(c)(2)(i), Income Tax Regs., defines a security for purposes of par. (c) of sec. 1.864-2, Income Tax Regs., as: "any note, bond, debenture, or other evidence of indebtedness, or any evidence of an interest in or right to subscr

13(c) (1994)), which exempts from the application of the Robinson-Patman Act "purchases of their supplies for their own use by * * * hospitals and charitable institutions not operated for profit." Accordingly, the issue in the Abbott Labs. case was whether the pharmaceutical products were sold to the hospitals for resale or for the hospitals'

13-167 (1988) (emphasis added). The New York City Administrative Code awards disability retirement because of inability to perform duties, regardless of the cause. Although petitioner could not perform his duties because he was suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, he was awarded disability retirement because he could not perform the

Petitioners incurred these expenses to comply with section 13(a)(2) of the 1934 Act, 15 U.S.C.

13(c) (1994)), which exempts from the application of the Robinson-Patman Act "purchases of their supplies for their own use by * * * hospitals and charitable institutions not operated for profit." Accordingly, the issue in the Abbott Labs. case was whether the pharmaceutical products were sold to the hospitals for resale or for the hospitals'

Petitioners incurred these expenses to comply with section 13(a)(2) of the 1934 Act, 15 U.S.C.

Petitioners incurred these expenses to comply with section 13(a)(2) of the 1934 Act, 15 U.S.C.