Procter & Gamble Wins R&d Credit Case Against The Irs
- Date: 2010-08-06 - Word Count: 389
Share This!
On June 25, 2010, the U.S. District Court in Procter & Gamble Co. and Subsidiaries (P&G) v. United States (Case No. 1:08-cv-00608-TSB) granted partial summary judgment in favor of P&G in an important tax case involving the federal R&D Tax Credit. In the case, the court ruled on the issue of whether a taxpayer must include intercompany transactions as part of its Gross Receipts when calculating the R&D Credit's base amount.
During the period in question (2001-2005), P&G conducted its business through various subsidiary corporations that regularly engaged in intercompany transactions with one another. In calculating its R&D Credit, P&G aggregated all of its subsidiaries' research expenditures and gross receipts under one "controlled group". In this calculation, P&G disregarded the gross receipts that were generated from intercompany transactions between its domestic and foreign subsidiaries.
The IRS originally accepted P&G's approach under audit. However, months later, the IRS reversed its position based on new advice from IRS Chief Counsel. By including the intercompany transactions in P&G's gross receipts, the IRS' calculation increased P&G's base amount which decreased the company's R&D Tax Credit for the years at issue. Under this new guidance, the IRS issued a notice of proposed adjustment and assessed P&G for the underpayment of tax.
In court, P&G argued that the plain language of Code Section 41(f) states that all members of a controlled group of corporations should be treated as a single taxpayer. Conversely, the IRS contended that the proper definition of gross receipts is defined in [now] Code Section 41(c)(7).
After reviewing both arguments, the court recognized that including intercompany transactions in a company's gross receipts calculation could result in doubling (or more) of the R&D Credit's base amount, which is contrary to the intent of the regulations. The court agreed with P&G that Code Section 41(f) controlled, and further that Code Section 41(c)(6) did not compel a different result. The Court further rejected the IRS' argument that the aggregation rules only applied to the calculation of qualified research expenditures, and not to gross receipts. In addition, the court found no basis for the IRS' distinguishing between domestic and foreign affiliate gross receipts.
Ultimately, the Court ruled in P&G's favor and confirmed that all members of a controlled group should be treated as a single taxpayer when computing the base amount of the group's R&D Credit calculation.
During the period in question (2001-2005), P&G conducted its business through various subsidiary corporations that regularly engaged in intercompany transactions with one another. In calculating its R&D Credit, P&G aggregated all of its subsidiaries' research expenditures and gross receipts under one "controlled group". In this calculation, P&G disregarded the gross receipts that were generated from intercompany transactions between its domestic and foreign subsidiaries.
The IRS originally accepted P&G's approach under audit. However, months later, the IRS reversed its position based on new advice from IRS Chief Counsel. By including the intercompany transactions in P&G's gross receipts, the IRS' calculation increased P&G's base amount which decreased the company's R&D Tax Credit for the years at issue. Under this new guidance, the IRS issued a notice of proposed adjustment and assessed P&G for the underpayment of tax.
In court, P&G argued that the plain language of Code Section 41(f) states that all members of a controlled group of corporations should be treated as a single taxpayer. Conversely, the IRS contended that the proper definition of gross receipts is defined in [now] Code Section 41(c)(7).
After reviewing both arguments, the court recognized that including intercompany transactions in a company's gross receipts calculation could result in doubling (or more) of the R&D Credit's base amount, which is contrary to the intent of the regulations. The court agreed with P&G that Code Section 41(f) controlled, and further that Code Section 41(c)(6) did not compel a different result. The Court further rejected the IRS' argument that the aggregation rules only applied to the calculation of qualified research expenditures, and not to gross receipts. In addition, the court found no basis for the IRS' distinguishing between domestic and foreign affiliate gross receipts.
Ultimately, the Court ruled in P&G's favor and confirmed that all members of a controlled group should be treated as a single taxpayer when computing the base amount of the group's R&D Credit calculation.
Related Tags: r&d tax credit, research tax credit, r&d credit
Your Article Search Directory : Find in Articles
Recent articles in this category:
- Guide To Finding The Right Irs Debt Help Solution For Your Situation
Finding the right IRS debt help for your situation is crucial. Where you turn for assistance will de - The Basic Function Of Accounting
Accounting is a profession as old as the hills. It was a well known practice in the Roman, Ancient E - The Fundamental Concepts Of Accounting
The Federal Election was held in Australia on 21st of August 2010. During the rather boring election - Higher Earners Warned Over Tax Relief
Those that fall into the higher earners bracket have been warned that the government may impose furt - 3 Ways To Settle Irs Tax Debt For Less
You can settle IRS tax debt for less if you know your options. There are several ways that you can s - Five Steps To Finding The Best Tax Lead Company For Your Business
The lead buying business has become an efficient and proven form of outsourcing marketing efforts to - Truly Effective International Tax Advice
A big concern for the public and corporate business units is to deal with the international tax at t - How To Avoid Making The Common Tax And Bookkeeping Mistakes?
Even though who consider themselves in the financial loop may fall prey to some of the most common t - Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
The Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentive program works with the private ownership of resident - How To Appeal Your Property Tax Bill
The responsible homeowner will want to do a thorough check of their property tax bill to ensure they
Most viewed articles in this category:
- New Tax Rules for the Poor
New tax rules for 2007 will bring about a good year for the poorest of tax-filers in Maryland. Tax-f - The Best LEGAL Tax Shelter in the World-- Your Home-Based Business!
Welcome to the best legal tax shelter in the world-- you home-based business! As long as you keep go - Income Tax Questions Answered Because of Radio - The World Is a Client of "Better Business"
Having hosted a financial radio program over several years has exposed me to many questions. Some of - IRS Alert: Tax Payers Need to be on the Look out for Fraud
Tax-Definition.org (http://www.tax-definition.org) is reporting on the second part of the tax - 2007 Brings Tax Relief for N.Y. Residents
As of January 1, 2007, New York residents have been benefiting from a decrease in hospital bills, an - Figuring Out Your Tax Return Filing Status
When you are ready to plop down and start preparing that tax return, one of the first questions is y - Lost Last Year's Tax Return?
It happens every year. Just when you get motivated to get rolling on your taxes, you realize you can - IRS Is Focusing on Schedule C Filers
In the last few tax years IRS has been paying more attention to taxpayers who file a schedule C. The - Estate Taxes
Federal estate tax applies to the transfer of property at death. The estate of a person who died is - Deductions Missed In Taxes
The deductions which are often missed by tax payers are as follows: Old points on refinancing: The
