Walls v. Commissioner
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
RAUM,
Petitioners, husband and wife, filed joint Federal income tax returns with the Cincinnati, Ohio, Service Center, and they resided at Carmel, Indiana, when their petitions were filed. For both years in question, petitioners elected the accrual method of accounting in respect of the activity at issue. Hereinafter, all references to "petitioner" in the singular will be to Ralph E. Walls. He is a dentist, and during the tax years was actively engaged in the practice of dentistry in Indiana.
On December 8, 1977, petitioner entered into a "mining Lease" with Wyoming and Western Coal Reserves, Inc. (WW). 1 Under this "Mining Lease", which was actually a sublease, petitioner was entitled to mine all of the "economically recoverable" coal contained in and on 15 acres of land in Weld County, Colorado, for a period of 10 years plus the remainder of 1977. In exchange, petitioner was to pay WW a $1,000 "lease deposit", refundable upon termination, as well as royalties. In respect of the latter, the lease provided as follows:
6.
(a) Lessee will pay Lessor a minimum annual royalty payment of $67,500. The minimum royalty payment herein provided for shall be recoupable at the rate of $1.50 per ton of coal sold or mined, removed and marketed. One fourth of the minimum annual royalty payment for the first lease year is payable at the inception of this lease. The balance is payable on or before December 31, 1977. The next nine minimum annual royalty payments are payable on or before December 31, of the following nine years.
All royalty payments made to Lessor will have a cumulative effect with reference to the requirement of paying the minimum royalty payments. Therefore, *279 any royalty paid by Lessee will be applied towards the annual minimum payment requirement. Minimum royalties are nonrefundable.
(b) In the event that the Lessee shall sell coal in place by way of a carved-out production payment or otherwise, Lessee will be obligated to pay Lessor a royalty payment to the same extent as if the coal had been mined, removed and marketed. Such royalties shall be due and payable within eighteen months of the date on which the contract creating the production payment is made.
In an "Addendum to Mining Lease", also executed by petitioner and WW on the same day, December 8, 1977, it was stated that the minimum annual royalty payments due on December 31, 1979, and thereafter could be paid by "cash or note". The addendum set forth the required form for the note, which was (in part) as follows:
The undersigned promises to pay WYOMING AND WESTERN COAL RESERVES, INC., SIXTY SEVEN THOUSANDS FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS with interest*280 at 6% per annum from date hereof.
This is a non-recourse note. Payments to be made to payee from all coal mined, in excess of the initial 90,000 tons, on the basis of $2.00 per ton of coal sold or mined, removed and marketed from the Leased Premises.
The form note did not specify a time for payment.
Petitioner paid one-quarter ($16,875) of the 1977 "minimum annual royalty payment" with his own check, and borrowed the remainder from Coal and Minerals Leasing and Development Corporation (CM). The note to CM was for $51,625 (presumably this included funds for the $1,000 "lease deposit") with 10-percent annual interest, and was due on December 31, 1997. By its terms, the note also covered any amounts loaned to Walls by CM in 1978. The note was nonrecourse, with payment to be made from petitioner's proceeds from the coal lease. Collateral for the loan was all coal leased to petitioner by WW in excess of 90,000 tons.
Petitioner also entered into a "Contract for the Sale of Coal" with CM, under which he was to sell 90,000 tons of coal to CM at $2.50 per ton. This sale was said to constitute the creation of a "carved out production payment". Payment was to be made on December 31, 1987, although*281 CM could extend this payment date 10 years by undertaking to pay 10-percent annual interest on the "principal balance". Prior to the due date, payments of principal and interest were to be made exclusively from receipts of coal mined and marketed. The contract also stated:
3. As additional inducement for the Seller's [Walls'] entering into this contract, Buyer [CM] hereby agrees to lend Seller $51,625 to be repaid under the terms of the non-recourse promissory note attached hereto as Exhibit B, and further agrees to lend another $50,625 to Seller in 1978.
4. Buyer is entitled to the net proceeds from the initial 90,000 tons of coal mined from the Leased Premises.
5. Buyer agrees to commence mining as soon as practicable.
Petitioner did borrow another $50,625 from CM in 1978, apparently to use toward the minimum royalty for that year. Furthermore, rather than paying his $16,875 cash portion of the 1978 royalty in a lump sum, he signed a note dated December 8, 1977, promising to pay WW that principal amount in 12 monthly installments of $1,481.04, with 10-percent annual interest on the unpaid principal from January 1, 1978. The first installment was due January 15, 1978, and*282 the last was due December 15, 1978. It appears that only nine installments were paid, totaling $13,329.36. This amount combined with the $50,625 borrowed from CM gives a total of $63,954.36, which was deducted by petitioner in 1978 as a $63,171.33 royalty and $783.03 as interest.
No coal was mined in 1977 or 1978 on the property leased by petitioner. In respect of 1979, petitioner, in accordance with the addendum, elected to execute a nonrecourse promissory note instead of paying the "advance royalty" in cash. The parties agree that sufficient economically recoverable coal reserves were available to secure any nonrecourse notes executed pursuant to the addendum.
On their 1977 Federal income tax return, petitioners claimed a deduction for royalties in respect of the WW lease of $67,500. On their 1978 return, the royalty deduction claimed was $63,171.33. In the notices of deficiency, the Commissioner disallowed these deductions in full, asserting inter alia that it had not been established that the royalties were "properly attributable to" the years in question.
The Government, relying on
The payor shall treat the advanced royalties paid or accrued in connection with mineral property as deductions from gross income for the year the mineral product, in respect of which the advanced royalties were paid or accrued, is sold. For purposes of the preceding*284 sentence, in the case of mineral sold before production the mineral product is considered to be sold when the mineral is produced (i.e., when a mineral product first exists). However, in the case of advanced mineral royalties paid or accrued in connection with mineral property as a result of a minimum royalty provision, the payor, at his option, may instead treat the advanced royalties as deductions from gross income for the year in which the advanced royalties are paid or accrued. See section 446 (relating to general rule for methods of accounting) and the regulations thereunder. For purposes of this paragraph,
Thus, according to the Government, the advanced royalties*285 paid by petitioner in 1977 and 1978 are not deductible in those years because no coal was produced and the royalties were not paid as a result of a "minimum royalty provision". Before determining the correctness of this position, it will be useful to consider some background in respect to
As originally promulgated in 1960,
In general, a minimum royalty provision requires that a "substantially uniform amount of royalties" be paid at least annually over the term of the lease, in the absence of production requiring even greater royalties. Thus, if no mineral product is produced (mined) during a given year, no royalty deductions are allowed in that year unless royalties are paid or accrued as a result of a provision in the lease requiring that substantially uniform royalties be paid each year of the lease.
In
The Government argued in
[T]his argument misses the mark. To qualify for the deduction, the petitioner must meet the terms of the regulation, which sets out that a minimum royalty provision must
We think that*288 this explication of
Petitioner raises a number of arguments in respect of the validity of all or a portion of the amended version of
*289 We have concluded that the royalties paid by petitioner in 1977 and 1978 were not paid "as a result of a minimum royalty provision". Therefore, the royalties are not deductible until the year in which coal is produced. Since the parties agree that no coal was produced in 1977 or 1978, the Government is entitled to prevail on this issue as a matter of law. Accordingly,
Footnotes
1. Petitioner also executed a slightly altered version of this "Mining Lease" on December 30, 1977, but this circumstance does not appear to be of any consequence to the issue presented by the motion for partial summary judgment.↩
2. Petitioner focuses in particular on the alleged invalidity of the second sentence of
sec. 1.612-3(b)(3), Income Tax Regs. , which provides that mineral sold before production is considered to be sold when the mineral is first produced, because in the absence of this provision the "carved out production payment" sold to CM in 1977 might be sufficient to render the 1977 and 1978 royalty payments deductible in the years paid. Petitioner asserts that this sentence should be held invalid even if the remainder of the amended regulation is valid, because the sentence in question was not in the proposed amendment but rather was inserted in the final regulation without opportunity for comment. However, in :Wing v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 17, 35 (1983)The only arguably substantial change regarding petitioner would be the second sentence of the regulation. We think that sentence is sufficiently related to the first sentence as to be merely explanatory in nature. Such a minor change therefore did not require a second round of comment before the regulation could be properly adopted.↩
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.