Commissioner v. Indianapolis Power & Light Co.
493 U.S. 203, 107 L. Ed. 2d 591, 1990 U.S. LEXIS 332 (1990)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A refundable customer deposit held by a utility company to ensure payment of future bills is not taxable income upon receipt because the utility lacks complete dominion over the funds, as the customer retains the right to control the deposit's ultimate disposition.
Facts:
- Indianapolis Power & Light Company (IPL) required approximately 5% of its customers, those with suspect credit, to pay a deposit to insure prompt payment of future electric bills.
- The deposit amount was typically twice the customer's estimated monthly bill.
- IPL paid interest on the deposits it held.
- A customer could obtain a full refund of the deposit in cash or by check upon establishing acceptable credit or terminating service.
- Alternatively, at the customer's option, the refunded amount could be applied to pay for future electricity bills.
- IPL did not segregate the deposit funds but commingled them with its general funds, having unfettered use of the money.
- For accounting purposes, IPL treated the deposits as current liabilities on its books, not as income.
- Any deposits unclaimed after seven years escheated to the state of Indiana.
Procedural Posture:
- The Commissioner of Internal Revenue audited Indianapolis Power & Light Company's (IPL) tax returns and asserted deficiencies, contending that customer deposits were taxable income upon receipt.
- IPL petitioned the United States Tax Court for a redetermination of the asserted deficiencies.
- The Tax Court, in a reviewed decision, ruled in favor of IPL.
- The Commissioner, as appellant, appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
- The Seventh Circuit affirmed the Tax Court's decision in favor of IPL, the appellee.
- The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a conflict between the Seventh and Eleventh Circuits on this issue.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a customer deposit that a utility requires to ensure payment for future services, which is refundable upon the establishment of good credit or termination of service and bears interest, constitute taxable income to the utility in the year of receipt?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Blackmun
No. A refundable customer deposit is not taxable income upon receipt because the utility does not have complete dominion over the funds. The critical issue is the parties' rights and obligations at the time the payment is made. Unlike an advance payment where the recipient has a right to keep the funds so long as it performs its obligations, IPL's right to keep the deposit was contingent on future events beyond its control, namely a customer's default. The customer retained the right to insist upon repayment in cash, and it was the customer's choice whether to receive a refund or apply the deposit to future bills. This element of customer control distinguishes the deposit from a non-refundable advance payment and analogizes it to a loan. The fact that IPL had temporary, unfettered use of the funds is not dispositive, as the same is true of a loan, which is not considered income.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the distinction between a non-taxable security deposit and a taxable advance payment for tax purposes. The Court rejected a simple economic benefit test, focusing instead on the concept of 'complete dominion' at the moment of receipt. The ruling emphasizes that if a customer retains the right to control the ultimate disposition of the funds (i.e., can demand a cash refund), the recipient lacks the necessary dominion for the funds to be considered income. This 'customer control' framework provides a key analytical tool for businesses, such as landlords and service providers, in structuring and treating customer deposits, protecting them from immediate tax liability on funds they have a clear obligation to repay.
