Rooney v. Commissioner
1987 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 27, 88 T.C. No. 25, 88 T.C. 523 (1987)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Compensation received in the form of goods and services must be included in gross income at its objective fair market value. A taxpayer may not subjectively discount the value of such goods and services based on their personal assessment of worth or quality.
Facts:
- David Rooney, Richard Plotkin, and Grafton Willey were partners in the accounting firm Rooney, Plotkin & Willey.
- The partnership had a practice of accepting goods and services from clients as payment, using a 'cross-accounting' system to credit the client's account for the retail price of the items received.
- In 1981, four of the partnership's clients became delinquent in paying for accounting services.
- After collection efforts proved unsuccessful, the partners and their families received various goods and services from these four clients, including toiletries, plumbing work, automobile tires, and restaurant meals.
- The partners became dissatisfied, believing some of the goods were overpriced and some of the services were not satisfactorily performed.
- The partners concluded that accepting these goods and services was the only way to recover any portion of the amounts owed by these financially troubled clients.
- The partnership unilaterally discounted the retail value of the received goods and services on its own books, reducing its reported gross receipts by $1,963.78.
- The four clients were never informed that the partnership had internally discounted the value of the goods and services for which they were given credit.
Procedural Posture:
- The Commissioner of Internal Revenue determined deficiencies in the petitioners' 1981 federal income taxes, alleging they underreported income from their partnership.
- The Commissioner issued separate notices of deficiency to the Rooneys, the Plotkins, and Mr. Willey.
- The petitioners filed a petition in the U.S. Tax Court to challenge the Commissioner's determination.
- Prior to trial, the petitioners conceded other unrelated adjustments, leaving the valuation of the bartered goods and services as the sole issue before the court.
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 the Internal Revenue Code permit a taxpayer to value goods and services received as income based on their subjective opinion of worth, rather than the objective fair market value established in the marketplace?
Opinions:
Majority - Simpson, Judge
No. The Internal Revenue Code requires an objective measure of fair market value for goods and services received as income, not a subjective valuation by the recipient. The court held that the fair market value of the goods and services received by the petitioners is the retail price charged by the partnership's clients to their other customers. Citing Koons v. United States, the court reasoned that tax administration cannot depend on the 'whimsical' state of mind of an individual taxpayer and must be based on objective measures. The petitioners were not under compulsion; they made a business decision to accept compensation in a form other than cash. The prices they sought to discount were the established market prices accepted by other customers, and therefore represent the objective fair market value for tax purposes.
Analysis:
This case solidifies the principle that fair market value for tax purposes must be determined objectively, preventing taxpayers from arbitrarily reducing their taxable income based on personal dissatisfaction with non-cash compensation. The decision protects the integrity of the tax system by rejecting subjective valuation, which would be administratively unworkable for the IRS. It reinforces that a 'willing buyer, willing seller' standard applies even when one party feels they are in a difficult bargaining position, as the objective market price, not the recipient's personal circumstance, is the determinative factor.
